Globe essay

That toxic tug-of-war

In a custody battle, making peace is more important than being right. Indeed, the very notion of 'parental alienation' glosses over whose rights are at issue namely, the child's

HARVEY BROWNSTONE

From Saturday's Globe and Mail

April 24, 2009 at 11:40 PM EDT

Several recent court cases have focused on the serious problem of parental alienation. Although many are hearing about it for the first time, it has always been a prevalent concern in high-conflict custody litigation.

Mental-health professionals debate the definition of parental alienation, and whether it is a clinical "syndrome," but few would disagree that the problem exists. In simple terms, "parental alienation" refers to a parent's persistent campaign of denigrating the other parent to their child (sometimes called "brainwashing" or "poisoning" the child against the other parent), which causes the child to unjustifiably reject the other parent.

Alienating conduct can take many forms: badmouthing the other parent's personality and conduct; portraying the other parent as dangerous, abusive or as having abandoned or not loving the child; withdrawing love and affection from a child who expresses positive feelings about the other parent; and denying the other parent contact with the child. While some mean by "parental alienation" only the misconduct of custodial parents, we judges often see high-conflict cases where both parents badmouth each other to the children, cruelly placing them in conflicts of loyalty. Moreover, such conduct is not in the exclusive domain of mothers or fathers; both engage in it.

In my view, the term "parental alienation" incorrectly identifies the target parent as the victim. The true victims are the children, who are innocent in parental break-ups. Every child has a right to enjoy a loving relationship with both parents. Since it is the child's right that is being violated by a parent's alienating behaviour, it is the child who is being alienated from the other parent. However you name it, there is no doubt that children are at risk of emotional harm when they become weapons, pawns and spies for bitter, angry, vengeance-seeking parents who turn custody disputes into battles for power and control battles that often focus entirely on the parents' needs and not at all on the children's.

There is widespread dissatisfaction among parents with the family justice system. Among the most angry are non-custodial parents desperately seeking to enforce access to their children. Judges hear daily from heartbroken parents who say that the legal system vigorously enforces child support but does not care about enforcing access. I see their point, but it troubles me when people liken the enforcement of a parent-child relationship to the collection of a debt. Children are not pieces of property that can be "seized" or "garnisheed"; they are vulnerable human beings. Decisions affecting a child's emotional well-being must be carefully made, always with a view to making a child's life better, not worse.

Non-custodial parents routinely allege parental alienation when access is denied. The court must first decide if the allegation is valid. Family dynamics are layered and complex, and it is no simple task to find out why a child is refusing to see a non-custodial parent. What is the child's age and stage of development? Does the child have independent reasons stemming from memories of events before the break-up, or relating to the way access is occurring? Has the child been coached, bribed, threatened or manipulated to express negative views about the access parent? Family courts often require the assistance of assessments from psychologists or social workers. This can take time, which intensifies the problem if alienation is occurring.

If the court finds that alienation is causing a denial of access, what are its options? Sometimes supervised access will take place at an access centre, where trained staff observe the quality of parent-child interactions. Or a court could order police to enforce access. While this can be effective, the police exercise discretion in enforcement, and are understandably reluctant to "arrest" children and drag them kicking and screaming to visits with parents they are adamantly refusing to see. As difficult as this may be for some parents to accept, a child's negative feelings about a parent are real and true for the child, however unjustified these feelings may be.

WON THE BATTLE, LOST THE WAR

A second possibility is to find an alienating parent in contempt of court and impose a fine or jail sentence. This can be effective, but there is a serious risk of backfire. When a custodial parent conveys to an alienated child that the other parent has caused financial hardship because of the fine, the child's negative feelings toward the non-custodial parent can intensify. Even worse, a child whose custodial parent says, "Your mom/dad sent me to jail," may see the custodial parent as a martyr, and become even angrier at the non-custodial parent. Moreover, when a custodial parent goes to jail, the other parent does not automatically get custody; the children's aid society may have to intervene to determine a proper placement for the child during the parent's absence. Some children end up in foster care during this period, and are unforgiving toward the parent they believe put them there. I have seen more than my share of non-custodial parents who "won the battle but lost the war."

 

Court proceedings are not conducive to peacemaking; they tend to increase acrimony between parents, which is bad for children. Many non-custodial parents simply walk away from an impossible situation, devastated to lose contact with their children, but consoled to know that their children's exposure to a toxic tug-of-war is over. If this happens, custodial parents should know that their "victory" may be short-lived. Adult children often seek out estranged parents and assess the situation for themselves, with an independent mind and open heart. A custodial parent who has selfishly cut the other parent out of their child's life may end up being the excluded one when the child grows up and learns the truth.

Another option is to suspend or terminate child support. After all, if a non-custodial parent is being deprived of the right to see the child, why should he or she have to pay support? Proponents of this argument forget that access is the child's right, as is the right to be financially supported. If the child is being victimized by not getting to see a parent, it does not help the child to also be deprived of the right to be supported by that parent. The law must be child-focused. Children must be fed, clothed and housed even if they are being deprived of a relationship with an alienated parent. Two wrongs do not make a right. The only cases I am aware of where a court suspended or terminated child support for a minor child because of parental alienation, are cases where the custodial parent's financial circumstances guaranteed no reduction in the child's standard of living even without child support. Different considerations might apply for adult children seeking continued support from alienated and blameless parents, but for minor children it is highly unlikely that a child's financial lifeline will be compromised as a remedy for parental alienation.

In some alienation cases, the children's aid society intervenes to protect children from emotional harm. If the children are lucky, the parents may be amenable to counselling to overcome their emotional baggage, so they can reinvent themselves from ex-partners to co-parents. In some cases a relative will offer a suitable parenting plan that insulates the children from the toxic parental conflict. Sadly, in other cases, children end up in foster care, as this is the only way they can have peace and neutrality in their lives.

In severe cases, can the court simply change custody from the alienating to the alienated parent? Yes, but only if, in all the circumstances, it would be in the child's best interests. The alienated parent must establish that he or she can best meet all of the child's needs. This can be a very difficult hurdle for an alienated parent who has had little or no contact with the child for some time. If custody is to change, intensive counselling and therapy are almost always ordered. Some therapy programs are more intrusive, lengthy and costly than others and there is no guarantee of success. There is no one-size-fits-all when it comes to the emotional health and well-being of parents and children.

RESPECT, FOR THE CHILD'S SAKE

Could parental alienation be avoided by ordering joint custody with 50-50 shared parenting in every case? Should courts divide up the elements of custody to create parallel parenting regimes? Many say yes. Judges say it depends on the individual circumstances of each case. Experts tell us that many alienating parents are suffering from personality disorders, and would not be amenable to a co-parenting arrangement. After 14 years on the bench, I seriously doubt a court order can make immature non-communicative parents become child-focused and treat each other with mutual respect, for their child's sake. But I have seen it happen. Judges try their best to do what is right for children, given the often incomplete and conflicting evidence we get.

I believe that family counselling and therapy are the most important resources that separated parents need to overcome their pain and anger. Parents must carefully consider the impact of their behaviour on their children and become aware of the potentially devastating consequences to themselves and their children of high-conflict litigation. Reaching compromise and making peace for the sake of your children are more important than being right. Having healthy, well-adjusted and happy children is more important than getting revenge. Parents can have new partners, but no child gets a second childhood. Children learn about relationships and parenting from observing their own parents. No one should forget this.

Harvey Brownstone is a family court judge in Toronto and the author of Tug of War: A Judge's Verdict on Separation, Custody Battles, and the Bitter Realities of Family Court.

 

 

Commentary by the Ottawa Mens Centre

 

The Globe and Mail has deleted a very large number of posts.

Here below is commentary posted that the Globe Removed.

 

 

"Your mom/dad sent me to jail" - Brownstone is providing "a justification" as to why mothers should not be jailed for failing to facilitate access. Judges have a very large range of tools to do the job, but choose, not to against women. Women simply get unbridled support to do almost anything and everything they want.

Brownstone also engages in "the process of justification" to give "all the reasons" why, (a mother) should not be denied child support when denying access. He talks about "its the child's right to child support". There is an unstated assumption that the child will starve if child support is not received. Bullony.

Brownstone FAILS to state that "its the child's right to have a relationship with both parents, and, that child support, GREED, drives custody issues, show dead beat mother's that they lose financially and their motive will disappear, but, no, Brownstone provides the ultimate incentive to flout orders, that is, "flout access, and I wont do anything"... Why go to see Justice Brownstone exhibit such a callous disregard for children's emotional rights that are obviously more than the financial rights of "the mother"..

www.OttawaMensCentre.com

 

 

Ottawa Mens Centre.com, from Ottawa Home of the Corrupt Judge Allan Sheffield, Canada) wrote: "Family Counselling" This pure propaganda that you expect from a feminist judge. The reality is that if a case gets to a motion or an exceedingly rare trial, one or both the parties has a very serious personality disorder or mental illness. Those sort of people will NOT genuinely participate in any counsellling , therapy or mediation.

Sending a child to a one hour session with a shrink will not solve anything while with a vindictive mother hell bent on alienating the child 24/7 with carrots of every thing they could possibly want combined with threats.

The ONLY way "peace" can be ensured is by having mandatory legislation of a presumption of equal parenting after separation.

Justice Brownstone ignores the fact that other jurisdictions apply that legal presumption and have only a fraction of that litigation.

www.OttawaMensCentre.com

 

Ottawa Mens Centre.com, from Ottawa Home of the Corrupt Judge Allan Sheffield, Canada) wrote: Justice Brownstone's gift for public speaking, his ability to portray himself as god, his legal abilities, are only exceeded by his arrogance and the typical Judicial pathological hatred towards fathers.

Brownstone has been able to convince his superiors, that "he can do it", that Brownstone can be the Gobbels of the Judiciary, perhaps we could call him Justice Haw Haw, after that treasonous Englander who was the Third Reich's voice of propaganda.

Anyhow, the judiciary email group will be probably be running hot with suggestions on how they can get the Globe and Mail to remove those articles that don't show Brownstone or the judiciary in a positive light.

Brownstone, reveals, for Canadians to read, classic examples of what is called a legal term called "the process of justification" which of course is not a legal expression, its the same reasoning Criminals use to murder their opponents or simply engage in shop lifting.

Our judiciary, are probably , the greatest criminals in Canada, they are entrusted, to apply the law, but they don't, they use "the process of justification" to make endless draconian feminist politically correct decisions that destroy children's relationships with their father.

www.OttawaMensCentre.com

Repeated

 

Justice Brownstone's gift for public speaking, his ability to portray himself as god, his legal abilities, are only exceeded by his arrogance and the typical Judicial pathological hatred towards fathers.

Brownstone has been able to convince his superiors, that "he can do it", that Brownstone can be the Gobbels of the Judiciary, perhaps we could call him Justice Haw Haw, after that treasonous Englander who was the Third Reich's voice of propaganda.

Anyhow, the judiciary email group will be probably be running hot with suggestions on how they can get the Globe and Mail to remove those articles that don't show Brownstone or the judiciary in a positive light.

Brownstone, reveals, for Canadians to read, classic examples of what is called a legal term called "the process of justification" which of course is not a legal expression, its the same reasoning Criminals use to murder their opponents or simply engage in shop lifting.

Our judiciary, are probably , the greatest criminals in Canada, they are entrusted, to apply the law, but they don't, they use "the process of justification" to make endless draconian feminist politically correct decisions that destroy children's relationships with their father.

look at the research by Peter Roscoe at www.OttawaMensCentre.com

Peter who is not a criminal, is presently incarcerated at the Ottawa Detention Centre based on fabricated order for unpaid support. Peter has been the victim of several draconian orders, the worst being by Justice Denis Power of Ottawa which Peter successfully appealed to the Court of Appeal of Ontario, who put in a poison pill of costs, as they usually do, that is, you can win an appeal on the issue but they do "indirectly what cannot be done directly"

Many of the readers of this forum will know Peter Roscoe and will know that his health has taken a toll over the last year and your letters of support will be appreciated.
 

 

 

 

 

 

Ottawa Mens Centre.com, from Ottawa Home of the Corrupt Judge Allan Sheffield, Canada) wrote: "The court must decide" so says Justice Harvey P Brownstone, except what he does not state is the obvious fact, that a decision, a real decision, is unlikely ever to be made. A real decision requires real facts, and real facts cannot be determined in what is called "a quickie motion" which is where feminist judges like Brownstone do their dirty work by giving mothers virtually anything and everything they ask.

Brownstone talks about 'the harm of parental alienation' , wonderful stuff to read, sounds like he has grandchildren or kids running around his chambers...

Brownstone, just fails, conveniently omits to show any innovation, any leadership, as IS displayed by some the saints of the Ontario Judiciary, not all are tarred with the feminist brush, those judges live in a virtual closet, and dare not come out of that hetrosexual closet for fear of suffering the wrath of powerful feminists who control the appointment process.

www.OttawaMensCentre.com

.



 

Ottawa Mens Centre.com, from Ottawa Home of the Corrupt Judge Allan Sheffield, Canada) wrote: Brownstone's solution, to parential alienation, is 'supervised access' !
You just don't see or very rarely see a mother getting supervised access, and unless you earn several hundred thousand dollars a year, no father can afford to litigate to a trial of the issue which of course is where "real facts" are learned.

But, whats the point of a trial, if you have a judge, determined to engage in the process of justification?

Fact is, only around 5% of the cases set down for trial lists ever get to trial, most fathers are told, they will make a feminist decision, don't go to trial, so they settle.

For those father who persist, generally self represented, the underbelly of the judiciary step in, they use a "hit man" like Justice Allan Sheffield in Ottawa to make orders for "summary judgement' or like Denis Power who hit Peter Roscoe with a Vexatious Litigant order. Appealing these orders is next to impossible, Peter Roscoe was successful on his appeal of Power's order but, hit him with draconian costs.

www.OttawaMensCentre.com

 

 

Ottawa Mens Centre.com, from Ottawa Home of the Corrupt Judge Allan Sheffield, Canada) wrote: Justice Brownstone's revealing book, fails to describe the blunt very dirty, corrupt, realities of family law.

Justice Brownstone does not describe how the hatred towards fathers just oozes out of the courtroom walls, its such a pathological hatred that the courts are generally nothing more than a pretense of justice, its a stage, the judges and lawyers might as well be putting on a play, they all "pretend" that its law when its not, is political correctness gone mad.

Just how does the entire Superior Court of Ontario Family Division get to be such an insult to justice?

It starts with a feminist NDP government who dictate that judges go to "brainwashing school" thats right, judges must attend courses on feminist law that has as its mantra, that females are victims and males are those violent abusers who must show a reverse onus of proof that they are not violent, that they are not abusers, that they can parent, and that they don't suffer a mental health problem, and that they dont have an anger problem which or course is an impossible burden of proof.

You can't prove a double negative, its a Male Sharia law, enforced by judges who failed to spend time with their own children and were probably raised entirely by their mothers with an absent father.

Being born with a silver spoon protruding from your rear end, will definitely increase your odds of becoming a lawyer and a judge but unfortunately, it can also be a guaranteed way to raise children in snobby world with a conceited arrogance towards anyone not of their social circle. That's a general description, some judges are shining examples of humanity and professionalism but when, the administration of the courts, from the top down is rotten with Man Haters, its almost impossible for even the most reasonable judge to be able to do their job devoid of the all powerful feminist lobby groups.

www.OttawaMensCentre.com



www.OttawaMensCentre.com

 

 

 

Ottawa Mens Centre.com, from Ottawa Home of the Corrupt Judge Denis Power, Canada wrote: Peter Roscoe is presently incarcerated at the Ottawa Regional Detention Centre, ostentatiously on a FRO warrant for failing to pay child support.

He is anything but a dead beat dad.

Peter Roscoe was not allowed by Justice Denis Power to show the evidence that he did not have a millions in assets, in fact his material had literally scores of examples of fraud by his ex wife's lawyer who put before the court false information.

Peter Roscoe is another self represented father who simply wanted to be a father, and Justice Denis Power declared him a vexatious litigant. "enough is enough" said Power, he wanted to "get rid of him" another unrepresented father who just had the balls and the skills to put his case forward, Power could not deal with the level of proof provided so he decided to "fix him" and "fix him" he did.

Justice Power's order was appealed to the Ontario Court of Appeal successfully, but the Appeal court put a poison pill of costs to prevent him from litigating.

In law, its improper to do indirectly what is prohibited directly, Justice Denis Power is a classic example of that Criminal offence called "Obstruction of Justice" and is that criminal offence by Justice Denis Power that has put Peter Roscoe in Jail, its a lifetime sentence of indefinite repeated incarceration without ever a trial being held or the right to bring a variation proceeding.

Peter Roscoe has done more research on judicial bias than another person in Canada, he has made more efforts to take them to task in court than probably any other father around, he is an example of what it takes to get going when the going gets tough.

You can donate to Peter Roscoe's Jail Canteen fund by sending a Money Order made out to Peter Roscoe at
Peter Karl Roscoe C/o
Ottawa Carleton Detention Centre
2244 Innes Road
Ottawa ON
K1B 4C4

You are encouraged to send him letters of support.

www.OttawaMensCentre.com



Ontario is one of the few jurisdictions, that will only issue an order for joint custody, providing the mother consents ( can communicate is the term the courts use), that means Ontario Judges encourage women "not to communicate" so a joint custody order will not issue.

Ontario Judges have lots of tools in the box, you don't need "Ontario Joint Custody' to have equal shared parenting, an order for sole custody can incorporate virtually all the features of an order for joint custody except in name only and to deal with real problems.

The fact is, most Ontario Judges, use every excuse to give mother's what they ask for be it custody, support , financial division of net family property.

Those who claim "50/50 does not work well" are from the feminist camp, regardless of the name they use to post with.

Fact is, ask separated parents who did not need to litigate, who are the examples of successful parenting after separation, they all generally choose 50/50 parenting, there is no other method to give children of separated parents their emotional needs.

Judges know this but have, a feminist doctrine, a legal farce, an unwritten instruction to prevent any father's contested request for equal parenting.

"Substantial cooperation" can and will take place if there is a legal presumption of equal parenting after separation in the first place.

Spare a thought for Peter Roscoe, another father incarcerated for simply wanting to be a father. Read the prior post about his address for letters of support.



www.OttawaMensCentre.com

Ottawa Mens Centre.com, from Ottawa Home of the Corrupt Judge Denis Power, Canada) wrote: Absolute Proof of Bias in Ontario Family Court is evidenced by that courts abysmal failure if not blatant refusal, to make Spousal Support orders in favour of men.

Another example is court costs, Ontario Family Court will apply a double standard, if a woman has a lawyer, she creams out the father on costs, often the costs are deliberately incurred as part of a financial war of attrition, that generally she can survive and he cannot.

The same Ontario Family Court will not give an unrepresented male litigant court costs so, the entire system is stacked, its guaranteed to end in failure.

If judges were pilots, hardly a flight would ever get off the ground and any flight that got of the ground would crash.

If the same deliberate negligence was practiced by the medical profession, no patient would survive an operation, let along get examined appropriately, there would just be assumption and if male, the patient would be given a fatal prescription.

www.OttawaMensCentre.com

 

Ottawa Mens Centre.com, from Ottawa Home of the Corrupt Judge Allan Sheffield, Canada) wrote: Ontario Courts Pendulum is swinging against dads. Ontario Family Court judges are increasingly prepared to engage in knife fights with fathers in the courtroom except, the fathers are not just bound by the hands and feet, they are "Gagged", thats right gagged.

The vile most corrupt pitiful examples of humanity who belong in jail, are not your child sex offenders, they are, Ontario Superior Court Judges and of course the worst examples can be found at the Court of Appeal of Ontario blatantly and flagrantly, "obstructing justice" , fabricating evidence , that is, justifying evidence that knew or ought to know is false , thats achieved by saying "the father supplied no proof of his allegations" when its probably written like stone in certified court transcript, something that judges don't want fathers to have.

Ontario Judges have several dirty tricks up their sleeves, one is avoiding or delaying the supply of transcripts, they also can "ALTER TRANSCRIPTS" thats right, if an Ontario Judge does not "like" or "approve" of wording in a transcript, she or he can simply order the court reporter to type up something different.

Then there are the court staff who use every opportunity to make sure a father's transcripts "go missing".

In one famous case in Ottawa, the court reporter kept the money for transcripts and was never charged nor did the father ever get his transcripts.

Judges will "authorize" transcripts for mother's feminist lawyers of case conferences but ignore a similar request from a father, especially when incriminating admissions were made, you see, judges simply don't wish to deal with any form of perjury , fraud or fabrication of evidence, "by a woman".

If its a man, he can expect the book to thrown at him by way of criminal charges based upon nothing more than "allegations"

Its Ontario Government's policy of Male Gender Apartheid.

www.OttawaMensCentre.com

www





..

 

Ottawa Mens Centre.com, from Ottawa Home of the Corrupt Judge Allan Sheffield, Canada) wrote: Justice Browstone is just another judge encouraging women to flout access orders. His message, flout orders, do what every you like and you will NOT go to jail or even loose child support.

If mothers knew that they would go to jail for failing to comply with an access order, they would not flout the orders, if Mothers knew that child support payments would be lost if they flouted access orders than they would be more reluctant to flout access orders.

Brownstone's logic is almost narcissistic, Brownstone KNOWS that child support payments are not just for the child but have what is called "a spousal support component" that is even if the father is a deserving case for spousal support from the mother, a judge will still let a mother collect these inequitable payments even when she flagrantly ignores orders for access.

Its thanks to the double standards applied by judges like Brownstone that we have, a totally dysfunctional Family Court riddled in part at least, with Judges who apparently gain sadistic satisfaction from destroying childrens relationships with their father.

Ontario is simply a very bad place for dads.
If you a male, thinking of immigrating to Canada, give Ontario a wide berth.

www.OttawaMensCentre.com

 

Ottawa Mens Centre.com, from Ottawa Home of the Corrupt Judge Allan Sheffield, Canada) wrote: Jim Mohagan, Thanks for your well written post. I'll correct you on one statistic, its not just 1:5 kids who live without their father, its more like in excess of 50%.

I've asked several teachers this question and all report that about half the class do not live with their known assumed biological father.

I've got some more stats that are extremely alarming.

One in Three to One in six children have a man named on their birth certificate who is NOT their father. 50% of all women will have an affair when they know they can conceive a child with a man they are not married to.

Thats not all, Men, 80% of men, will have sexual relations with a woman when they know they could cause a pregnancy, mind you many will not have a brain or what brains they have are overtaken by hormonal desires.

Children have a "RIGHT" to know WHO their father is, and men have a right not to be named as a father, fraudulently, as many women simply choose an unwitting sperm donor and walking CASH Machine or alternative, get pregnant to a "unwitting donor" and get the CASH off the unwitting "father".

The only solution is Mandatory DNA tests upon birth registration of child and the "father" declaring paternity. The reality is, at least 30% are in for a very rude shock.

www.OttawaMensCentre.com

 

Ottawa Mens Centre.com, from Ottawa Home of the Corrupt Judge Allan Sheffield, Canada) wrote: Justice Brownstone although a highly skilled persuasive writer, shows a lack of comprehension of parenting. His bio sounds impressive, but, its impressive for the wrong reasons. His "family law" background is a list of being involved with those with an agenda of treating fathers as an inferior species that is less than human.

Justice Brownstone also shows, very clearly, his underlying goals, the picture or rather the propaganda message that he wishes to have others think

 

Ottawa Mens Centre.com, from Ottawa Home of the Corrupt Judge Allan Sheffield, Canada) wrote: Justice Brownstone holds a zealous view that is that of extreme feminists, who oppose equal parenting, he also has a long history of being involved as a lawyer in "enforcement" that is, the setting in place of child support that cannot be easily varied, that ends up being paid by a father's relatives because the father loses his employment.

He was a key person in the Family Responsibility Office, yes, thats the enforcement office that results in almost every up to date payor of child support being told that they are in arrears.

Thats the same office that a member of parliament investigated and found pallets, yes, pallets of Checks and Money Orders held in storage, thats right in deliberate storage so father's would "be in arrears".

To this day, Brownstone's FRO office engage in a similar war against men, its records can conveniently show an up to date payer as behind, and if a father wants a copy of that highly misleading statement he will have to pay $50 for a document, deliberately designed to be misleading.

Other jurisdictions operate very differently and equitably, but not Ontario, for which we can thank the likes of Anti - Father judicial activists and a society that is indoctrinated with feminist doctrines of gender superiority.

The problem is getting worse, not better, Ontario Family Court Judges are increasingly prepared to push the boundaries beyond what is a very obvious criminal offense but into retribution and revenge for daring to expose them publicly.

Experienced lawyers dare not say anything publicly, its all ready very public knowledge that some judges will also exact revenge against lawyers they don't like and sometimes those reasons go to having been a former law partner which you would think would be a conflict but no, its not a conflict unless the same judge says so.

Thats the Ontario Judiciary for you. A cess-pool of corruption.

www.OttawaMensCentre.com

  Ottawa Mens Centre.com, from Ottawa Home of the Corrupt Judge Allan Sheffield, Canada) wrote: Ontario has placed most interim child custody issues in the hands of the Feminist controlled local police "Domestic Violence Squads", that means, any call to 911 is vetted to ensure that generally he gets arrested and she gets the kids, HE is released on conditions, criminal conditions that make a custody decision.

If a mother flees the home with a child, its not abduction, if a father does the same thing, police will demand he "turn over the child" and threaten him with abduction charges if he does not. In fact they will keep him in jail for a day just to give her a head start and organize every feminist support in town to help her while he is still locked up to be eventually released without charges but after the damage is done.

For this, you can thank the Attorney General, who gave police forces policy directions that follow feminist doctrine.

www.OttawaMensCentre.com

 

 

Ottawa Mens Centre.com, from Ottawa Home of the Corrupt Judge Allan Sheffield, Canada) wrote: Thanks D. Bell for your post. Changes to legislation happen painfully slowly and first we need to bear in mind, how the family court system has changed, not by legislation, but by "directions" it's insidious, virtually silent process of change that has stark reminders of how the Nazis came to power.

Parental Alienation is just "an effect", we need to cure the cause, and that is one of a need for dramatic changes in legislation to bring Ontario into line with other less backward jurisdictions.

Australia for example has a legal presumption of equal parenting after separation, child support is varied upon the filing of a tax return, not by a separate bureaucracy whose sole purpose is to act as government office for Male Gender Apartheid called the Family Responsibility Office.

Child support in Ontario is factored to disenfranchise fathers, its specifically used to prevent access, deter access, deter any motion for variation by creating massive costs to vary while it costs nothing to institute.

(Justice Brownstone was a key person involved in that effort and has associated himself with those who have an anti father agenda, despite his god like eloquent words of wisdom that fail to hide his underlying motivations.)

The other major change required is a "Judicial Authority" that has real power.

Judges are granted absolute power, and its a fact, absolute power corrupts absolutely, it is just "too tempting", the judiciary attracts the very personalities who have serious personality disorders who are also highly skilled actors who can fool most people most of the time but not those who have to endure their collective endless abuses of power.

Ontario's judiciary includes judges who have no hesitation in ignoring absolute proof of fraud, they are lazy, they don't read pleadings and when they do, its so they can cut and paste to justify a decision they know is legally wrong but politically correct.

www.OttawaMensCentre.com

 

 

Ottawa Mens Centre.com, from Ottawa Home of the Corrupt Judge Allan Sheffield, Canada) wrote: Sorry D. Bell, it is not available on appeal. Most fathers cannot afford to appeal, and the Appeal court of Ontario is even more biased than its lower Superior court.

The "Divisional Court" is specifically set up , not to hear cases, to dispose of cases, its composed of the SAME judges in the same chambers.

If you read their decisions, its like watching criminal court where very large numbers of cases are heard in a day, there is rarely any genuine hearing of an appeal, its a pretense.

The Ontario Court of Appeal, pretends to hear appeals but, their judges are so biased, you need to read the extensive research and the summary of that research done by Peter Roscoe, You can read that at www.OttawaMensCentre.com

 

Warning to all Fathers - Justice Brownstone does not speak about the increasing number of fathers who are incarcerated, not for any criminal offence but for simply going to Ontario Superior Court Family Division and asking for access.

Fathers should read this post and take careful note because it is going to happen to a very large, an increasing number of Ontario Fathers.

Ontario Family Court judges do not make legal decisions, many are vile, corrupt and have a pathological hatred of fathers.

That typically translates into, a father losing his employment or business as a result of a mother's "allegations" a simple "she said" unproven, uncorroborated, un-cross examined and or course NO TRIAL. Just quickie motions heard by "arrangement", that is "judge shopping".

The court will accept almost any financial demand she makes for division of net family property, and will "invent" property, "invent" income for the purposes of "calculating child support. In fact, Ontario judges don't even need to see a claim of imputed income to order support at what ever level the judges mood feels like.

The same judge then orders "security for costs" and or "orders striking pleadings" and or "vexatious litigant orders" and restraining orders to further encumber the father in litigation that is virtually impossible to overcome.

These orders called "Sheffield Orders" or "Power Orders" are effectively, "DEPORTATION ORDERS" of Canadian Citizens and if they don't leave Canada or at least Ontario, they will be arrested, and repeatedly incarcerated for six months at a time, INDEFINITELY till they die.

This has happened to PETER ROSCOE, he is presently in jail in the Ottawa Regional Detention Centre. Contribute to his canteen fund with a Money Order made out to Peter Roscoe.

Send LETTERS OF SUPPORT to
Peter Karl Roscoe C/o
Ottawa Carleton Detention Centre
2244 Innes Road
Ottawa ON
K1B 4C4

 

 

 

Ontario Father's please take note of what has happened to Peter Roscoe. He is a classic example of how a loving father can be suddenly have his loving relationship with his son terminated by an Ontario Superior Court Family Division Judge who issues an order preventing him from having "any further litigation".

Judges are increasingly flagrantly abusing the judicial discretion to make "draconian orders".. Now, if you think you know "thins are bad", odds are you have no idea of exactly how "bad" , "things" are.

Peter Roscoe's pleadings detailed very carefully around 50 examples of fraudulent claims, generally put together by his ex wife's lawyer, outragious claims for which no supporting evidence was supplied or for which was contradicted by their own evidence.

Peter Roscoe did a commendable job for a self represented litigant. He had the misfortune to end up in front of Justice Denis Power who issued a "vexatious litigant order". Peter SUCCESSFULLY appealed Power's order but the Court of Appeal put in a poison pill, to indirectly achieve the same "effect.
Once that order is made, the lid in the father's coffin is nailed down with outrageous orders for child support that cannot be paid, even "retroactive" support orders going back more than 10 years even when the mother has a spousal support obligation to the father.

Peter Roscoe efforts have been "heroic" , he is dire need of any sort of help from anyone who may wish to help.

You can start by writing him letters of support, and a few bucks for his jail canteen fund will help him buy postage stamps to reply to you.

Apparently he is not receiving phone messages.

Money Orders can be made out to him directly and mailed to him with a letter to the
Ottawa Carleton Detention Centre, 2244 Innes Road Ottawa ON K1B 4C4

You can read the very detailed research by Peter Roscoe at www.OttawaMensCentre.com/roscoe

 

KUDOS to D. BELL ! Wow, You have correctly identified "one of the causes" of the problem.

With the greatest respect to those of the judiciary who are 'saints" , passionate, compassionate and objective judges of which there are many, there is, a very serious problem with a very large section of the Judiciary when it comes to their underlying motivations in decision making.

Lawyers if given a choice, will prefer female rather than male clients because females win costs hands down.

Many judges make decisions to force litigants to use a lawyer, if you don't use a lawyer, you are breaking their "unwritten code", at least thats a polite term for EXTORTION.

Many judges loath any litigant who is not using a lawyer, part of that is because self-reps are unfamiliar with civil procedure and the rules of court.

To give credit where credit is due, some judges, are in fact, extremely compassionate and understanding to self reps.

They are not the problem, there are various sub groups of judges who create destruction, one group are feminist activist judges who simply make decisions, political decisions rather than legal decisions, then you have those who make decisions that suit the legal profession.

A classic example is suing a lawyer, what judge in his right mind is going to find in favour of complaint about a lawyer?

What judge is going to make any favourable decision for a father who has been critical of a previous judges decision? Very few. Only objective impartial judges would listen very carefully and find against a brother judge. Thats breaking a "code of silence" its a bit like asking a Hells Angel to rat against another Hells Angel.

The criminal aspect appears when Judges make obviously corrupt decsions, in favour of a lawyer against a self represented litigant.

Thats a almost, guaranteed loosing argument but, not impossible.

Check out Roscoe's research at www.OttawaMensCentre.com / roscoe

 

 

 

JUDGES operate an "Illegal cartel" that is far more damaging to Canadian society than any Colombian Drug Cartel.

Judges, are lawyers and lawyers are highly educated and highly skilled at how NOT to get convicted of a criminal offense.

Judges also have absolute power, take a corrupt judge, give him absolute power and very quickly , you will see a propensity to make decisions against any self represented litigant who "dares to come to court without PAYING the legal CARTEL.

Now, "Cartels" are "agreements or arrangements to prevent or lessen competition unduly or enhance prices unreasonably."

Under Section 45 of the Competition Act, there is a market effects test for all agreements that potentially yes, "potentially" less competition.

Only 3 out of 20 prosecutions were successful in the last 20 years so, I don't like the chances of a judge or the entire judiciary of Ontario being convicted because obviously its an underbelly not the whole lot.

But, there is a "fiduciary responsibility", the supervisory judges KNOW OR OUGHT TO KNOW, that, several of their judges are NOTORIOUS..

Two of the Most NOTORIOUS JUDGES IN ONTARIO are;
Justice Allan Sheffield - and
Justice Denis Power both of Ottawa.

Their attitude to self reps, their decisions, have all the indicators of not just a flagrant abuse of judicial power but, other sinister very corrupt motivations.

What we need, is EVIDENCE. These two judges named a just "examples", you can go anywhere in Ontario and in any large group of judges you will find some rotten apples.

The problem is, victims don't speak to each other.

At the Ottawa Mens Centre web site, you will see a Judges directory.
If you have been the victim of a corrupt decision, please let us know, the name of the judge, and provide a copy of the decision.

Check out the research by Peter Roscoe at www.OttawamensCentre.com / rosco
Peter will appreciate any donations to his jail canteen fund by money order.

 

 

 

JUDGES - Pat 2.

When it comes to anti-self rep judges,
Two of the Most NOTORIOUS JUDGES IN ONTARIO are;
Justice Allan Sheffield - and
Justice Denis Power both of Ottawa.

Their attitude to self reps, their decisions, have all the indicators of not just a flagrant abuse of judicial power but, other sinister very corrupt motivations.

What we need, is EVIDENCE. These two judges named a just "examples", you can go anywhere in Ontario and in any large group of judges you will find some rotten apples.

The problem is, victims don't speak to each other.

At the Ottawa Mens Centre web site, you will see a Judges directory.
If you have been the victim of a corrupt decision, please let us know, the name of the judge, and provide a copy of the decision.

Not all judges operate as part of a criminal cartel,
just because there are a few bad eggs does not mean they are all "rotten". They like fathers, deserve a presumption of innocence, however just as there are "Dead Beat Parents" there are "Dead Beat Judges" and it takes a Dead Beat Judge to create a Dead Beat Dad.

Now, some ranting:-

Society does not use the expression, "Dead Beat Mother", even though, family court litigation is full of examples of mothers with very obvious severe personality disorders and mental health problems refusing to let "Their child" have any relationship with their father.
Once these children start to mature and think for themselves, that relationship, no matter how managed by the mother begins to unravel. Generally its only a matter of time.


Check out the research by Peter Roscoe at www.OttawamensCentre.com / rosco
 

 

 

D. Bell, Thanks, nice analogy. Brownstone does the legal terrorist act, he fails to "accurately state the issue", diverts the reader from the substantive issues, and, continues to make inappropriate orders that are positive to his personal position or that of political correctness rather than "dealing with the issue".

As D. Bell points out, Brownstone, blames the parents, the parents, are not to blame, no, not even that vindictive mother who gets every order she asks for.

The blame, lies squarely on Parliament, who have failed to legislate a legal presumption of equal parenting after separation.

The blame also lies with the judiciary who Encourage, flagrant contempt of access orders by, failing to impose any penalty.

Its so rare that a mother gets penalized that it makes headlines.
Remember Wayne Allen?

Parliament is also responsible for the terrorizing child support guidelines which are regarded as draconian and biased by other more progressive jurisdictions.

Judges know the law, they supposedly know legal reasoning but, fail to balance the probative value of children having relationships with both parents against the mother's loss of child support until she ceases the destructive behaviours.

Ontario Judges are not just negligent, they deliberately fail to apply rules of evidence impartially, or objectively, every decision is viewed through either a gender lens to be politically feminist correct or, as a way of intimidating anyone who dares to come to court without a lawyer.

Check out the research by Peter Roscoe at www.OttawaMensCentre.com

 

 

 

"We Judges" "not in the exclusive domain of mothers or fathers".

This typical of a passive aggressive judge lacing his comments to appear to favour both sides when he really has his own agenda.

First he says "not in the exclusive domain of mothers - and adds, or fathers. That in his mind clears him of an impression of bias.

Read further parental alienation "is not in the exclusive domain of mothers or fathers, both engage in it"...

Well the truth is mothers do it a hell of a lot more than fathers, the reality is, 95% of mothers get sole custody and it is "the power" the absolute power of "sole custody' that enables a "custodial parent" to spend 24/7 brainwashing a child to destroy their relationship with their father. If they really believed in the best interests of their child, most would have or should have agreed to 50/50 parenting.

With rare exceptions, any mother who only allows ever second weekend when dad was asking for 50/50 is engaging in parental alienation, thats it, ..

For Brownstone to say parental alienation is a 50/50 gender problem, is not just disingenuous , its false, its deliberately misleading while "pretending" to be "objective" and speaks in the plural sense "WE judges"...

Oh, really, just who is WE?

Check out the Roscoe research at www.OttawaMensCentre.com roscoe


Then Brownstone talks about "collection of a debt". As though, children really don't have a right to equal love and affection from both parents.

Mind you, Brownstone would be just as quick to put a father in jail for not paying support, and odds are that the income was simply a wild claim or allegation, without corroborating evidence.

Then he talks about "The court must decide if the allegation is valid".

Brownstone does not state that 95% of cases NEVER get to examine those allegations, which can only happen at trial. Ontario Family Court Judges are collectively, corruptly, making arrangements to "get rid of cases'.

Check out the Roscoe research at www.OttawaMensCentre.com roscoe

Thanks Tango Zulu for your post.

You identified one motivating factor MONEY, So, lets "follow the money", firstly, the biggest winners in family court are ... "the legal profession".... thats a question everyone can answer.

Who has the greatest motivation to throw fuel on the fire? "The Legal profession", who would loose the most if Equal Parenting Legislation occured... "the Legal Profession".

So, who earns the most? Well, judges are way up there on that list, so are social workers, prisons, child protection workers, foster homes and of course "the government".

Notice that local governments are "the applicant" quite frequently in family court? its to get child support from biological fathers to give to the government to save the government "social costs" such as welfare payments.

Who has the greatest power to force people to use the legal profession? JUDGES..

Who in family law is the person most likely to abuse their absolute power? JUDGES

Who can commit criminal offenses with total immunity and impunity?

JUDGES..

Who in society are the greatest dangers to children?

JUDGES

Who have the least chance of receiving disciplinary action for a professional mistake?

What profession has the least controls after "appointment?

JUDGES

What profession has the highest public duty responsibility with the
least amount of accountability ?
JUDGES...

Would you have such a professional as your heart or brain surgeon?

Check out the list of judicial bias by Peter Roscoe at www.OttawaMensCentre.com

...

 

Ottawa Mens Centre.com, from Judges make mistakes, Canada) wrote: Ontario Family Court judges make mistakes, sometimes mistakes are deliberate, others are just lazy.

Just to give you an example, here is a little Intelligence Test for Judges. It must be done in your head only, Do NOT Use a Paper, Pencil or a Calculator.

Take 1000 and add 40 to it. Now add another 1000 Now add 30 . Add another 1000 . Now add 20 . Now add another 1000 . Now add 10 . What is the total?

Now, Mary's father is paying support for five , thats right FIVE daughters, each is receiving support according to the child support guidelines at the five child rate;
1. Nana, 2. Nene, 3. Nini, 4. Nono, and ??? What is the name of the fifth daughter?

 

 

Ottawa Mens Centre.com, from Judges make mistakes, Canada) wrote: ANSWER 1

Did you get 5000 ?

The correct answer is actually 4100 .

If you did not use a calculator, you probably used judicial reasoning. politically correct reasoning rather than logic, that is that people see what they want to see.

ANSWER 2
If you answered NuNu then give yourself a pat on the back, you think like Justice Allan Sheffield , Justice Denis Power or any of the other lazy judges who don't read pleadings because they do not want to see anything that does not agree with them. Now the answer to the second question. No, the answer is not nunu , if you read the question, you would know that the fifth daughter's name was Mary.

www.OttawaMensCentre.com

 

 

 

 

Ottawa Mens Centre.com, from Ottawa home of the worst of the worst Family Court Judges, Canada) wrote: A. Nonymous , the system is carefully "framed" to disenfranchise men. The major inequity is that child support is well acknowledged to have "a spousal support component" yet, its guidelines without the needs and abilities of the parties being considered.

Ontario, promotes "sole parenting" by providing a financial windfall, a tax free income, providing of course you keep the father at less than 40% of the time which of course was chosen because every second weekend, one night ever other weekend and vacations, just puts a father under that figure. Its a figure chosen by feminists.

Take other jurisdictions, equal parenting is ASSUMED, and other costs are considered, but not in Ontario.

Ontario Family Law is corrupt across the board, the legislation is not just draconian, its Feminist Sharia Law for men.

Again, as Brownstone completely omits, the cause of the problem is Parliament who FAILED to legislate a legal presumption of equal parenting.

Its that failure of Parliament, that gives a very large financial incentive to mothers to take advantage of the courts bias, at detriment to their children, to seek to minimize the children's relationship with their father.

Good judges acknowledge this but are bound by the law, a law which every sane objective person regards as insane.

Its not an insane law, its a very devious law designed to make men second class human beings and to ensure that their legal rights are removed unless of course, you just happen to earn several hundred thousand dollars a year.

Ontario ensures that children's best interests are prevented from being argued in Family Court by reason of a whole box of tricks that underbelly judges use to "get rid of another father".

One is "striking pleadings", "vexatious litigant orders", "security for costs" and "restraining orders" "banishment orders" all of which become a "deportation order for Canadian Citizens"

www.OttawaMensCentre.com