The 20th anniversary of advocating for the children of divorce is fast approaching.
In 1998 I joined a shared parenting group that had a global voice, thanks mainly to some very well connected individuals.
I had already sat in family court for a couple of years following other family court cases, trying to understand why the courts were ok with the mother of my children beating the kids to the ground every time they asked to see me, even on court ordered days. The primary action of the web site was of persistent denied access as a result of sole custody, which caused my concern for my children.
It was common knowledge that it was the courts judiciary duty to rule in the best interests of the child. By joining this group it was immediately apparent I was just one father of literally hundreds of thousands of fathers that had been ejected out of their children's lives by the courts.
Most in the group blamed feminism for family court across the country having mother sole custody as the best interests. That's how things got interesting.
Obviously the courts position on denied access was nothing more than just 'recommending' the father have scheduled access to the children. The group in general was quite adamant feminism was responsible, pressuring the justice system with mottos like, 'all men are bad, all women are victims'. After sitting in family court for a total of 3 years the courts were far more interested in the financial aspect of the case and mostly about child support. Lawyers opened with child support in a custody hearing, totally against the rules and all any judge did was slightly admonished, 'Now you know Mr. Whatever.. Thornton... this hearing is not about child support but custody.
For years I assumed lawyers were just using child support or other financial aspects to strengthen the case for mother sole custody. With such a high mother sole custody rate it was easy to see why the group was fooled into thinking feminism was the driving factor. While youth in trouble are 80% single parent children it is not a problem with single parents.. poverty is the #1 indicator of a criminal life style and it certainly is criminal to force tens of thousands of kids to grow up in poverty by stealing their child support.
While I could certainly agree with the group something was amiss the results didn't match up what was really going on in court, the fixation mainly on child support, even though most hearings were about custody. If feminism was involved it would have to be courts using child support to punish the men. Even though many in the group leaned toward this conclusion there were to many conspirators for me. By 2000 I had read every study done on the children of divorce as well custody, crime and other rates.
The conclusion I came to was not feminism, as more mothers were getting screwed over child support than fathers. The high mother custody rate is nothing short of corruption of the system to generate revenue that will flow into government coffers.
Just because it is legal does not mean it is not criminal.
How many times have you heard child support is for the children which is a total lie...
Child support claw back is child support paid, then clawed back from single parents relying on the states welfare system. The justice system and the courts know child support is considered part of the governments revenue stream first and foremost. That is the truth. The American collection agency that collects the child support arrears even spends the bulk of its resources going after arrears that will wind up in the governments pocket.
While mother sole custody was high if there is even a whiff the child support will flow into governments pockets through child support claw backs... it goes to 100%. The courts are using sole custody to increate child support and the governments take, after the lawyers of course. It can't be more obvious its a scam to rip off the children of their child support. The courts are certainly not gender bias, that is just a smoke screen to hide the real fact the courts are tax bias.
The ugly brute holding our kids up by the ankles shaking any loose change out of their pockets is the tax man.
By 2002 I had labeled child support as the Non Custodial Parent Tax as it went to government. Child support claw back, which affected about 50,000 children just here in BC forcing them to grow up in poverty, while the government pockets the child support. Childhood poverty is caused by dead beat governments, not dead beat dads, just another cooperative cover up with fake news put out by MSM. The depth of deception is alarming to say the least even though it is common knowledge BC doubled the child poverty rate from 1 in 10 to 1 in 5 in a decade, right through a booming economy.
After another 12 years of making sure all the right people knew about the atrocities committed on children by ignoring their best interest in favor of enriching government, BC ended child support claw backs. That's how things got humorous.
Those that favored enriching government fought the truth with, 'child support is for the children' which our corrupt media made sure swamped the truth which is, child support whenever possible is for the government.
Those that opposed us labeled us as women haters but that flew out the window with ending claw back because it really favored mothers... which really caused the feminist to get a hate on for me.
On the other fathers rights groups no longer considered my efforts as positive because it did help mothers, lol it hurts government coffers so they have no warm spot for me in their hearts either.
Now you have to admit that is very humorous, feminists have always portrayed my as an enemy, fathers groups will not support helping the children if mothers get more money and governments protecting their revenue generator consider me an enemy which means the whole system is their army. Now that is a humorous conclusion
I know, it looks like the odds are stacked against me when it comes to ending the practices that corrupted the justice system. Not so, during my days with the shared parenting group a large number of influential people continued to support the reasons the group was first formed, shared parenting, the best interests of the child. They continue to support choking off the corruption.Claimer.
Every statement on the children of divorce, plural, I have made in any of my blogs, is from data, studies and witness statements.
'Child support is for the children' is a lie. It is for the government and they take it from our most vulnerable children.
Childhood poverty is caused by dead beat dads is a lie. It is caused by dead beat governments stealing the child support.
The courts are gender bias is false, the courts are tax bias and use sole custody to increase that revenue.
The best interests of the child is a lie. Across the country there are hundreds of thousands of children forced to grow up in poverty caused by child support claw backs, the governments slice.
Poverty is the number 1 indicator of a criminal lifestyle, 80% of the youth in trouble with the law are from that category.
That is the core of the corruption no justice, no investment is designed to choke off.
BC ended claw backs in 2015, Ontario this January. Small steps for me but giant steps for the children of divorce.
vox
That's the gist of it, a lot more details in previous posts.
Fair warning, it isn't over and 2018 is not the winds that bring change..it is the 20 year storm that will destroy and signal the start of rebuilding the dysfunctional system.
A system destroyed by corruption has never fixed itself... ever... it was replaced.
vox
In 1998 I joined a shared parenting group that had a global voice, thanks mainly to some very well connected individuals.
I had already sat in family court for a couple of years following other family court cases, trying to understand why the courts were ok with the mother of my children beating the kids to the ground every time they asked to see me, even on court ordered days. The primary action of the web site was of persistent denied access as a result of sole custody, which caused my concern for my children.
It was common knowledge that it was the courts judiciary duty to rule in the best interests of the child. By joining this group it was immediately apparent I was just one father of literally hundreds of thousands of fathers that had been ejected out of their children's lives by the courts.
Most in the group blamed feminism for family court across the country having mother sole custody as the best interests. That's how things got interesting.
Obviously the courts position on denied access was nothing more than just 'recommending' the father have scheduled access to the children. The group in general was quite adamant feminism was responsible, pressuring the justice system with mottos like, 'all men are bad, all women are victims'. After sitting in family court for a total of 3 years the courts were far more interested in the financial aspect of the case and mostly about child support. Lawyers opened with child support in a custody hearing, totally against the rules and all any judge did was slightly admonished, 'Now you know Mr. Whatever.. Thornton... this hearing is not about child support but custody.
For years I assumed lawyers were just using child support or other financial aspects to strengthen the case for mother sole custody. With such a high mother sole custody rate it was easy to see why the group was fooled into thinking feminism was the driving factor. While youth in trouble are 80% single parent children it is not a problem with single parents.. poverty is the #1 indicator of a criminal life style and it certainly is criminal to force tens of thousands of kids to grow up in poverty by stealing their child support.
While I could certainly agree with the group something was amiss the results didn't match up what was really going on in court, the fixation mainly on child support, even though most hearings were about custody. If feminism was involved it would have to be courts using child support to punish the men. Even though many in the group leaned toward this conclusion there were to many conspirators for me. By 2000 I had read every study done on the children of divorce as well custody, crime and other rates.
The conclusion I came to was not feminism, as more mothers were getting screwed over child support than fathers. The high mother custody rate is nothing short of corruption of the system to generate revenue that will flow into government coffers.
Just because it is legal does not mean it is not criminal.
How many times have you heard child support is for the children which is a total lie...
Child support claw back is child support paid, then clawed back from single parents relying on the states welfare system. The justice system and the courts know child support is considered part of the governments revenue stream first and foremost. That is the truth. The American collection agency that collects the child support arrears even spends the bulk of its resources going after arrears that will wind up in the governments pocket.
While mother sole custody was high if there is even a whiff the child support will flow into governments pockets through child support claw backs... it goes to 100%. The courts are using sole custody to increate child support and the governments take, after the lawyers of course. It can't be more obvious its a scam to rip off the children of their child support. The courts are certainly not gender bias, that is just a smoke screen to hide the real fact the courts are tax bias.
The ugly brute holding our kids up by the ankles shaking any loose change out of their pockets is the tax man.
By 2002 I had labeled child support as the Non Custodial Parent Tax as it went to government. Child support claw back, which affected about 50,000 children just here in BC forcing them to grow up in poverty, while the government pockets the child support. Childhood poverty is caused by dead beat governments, not dead beat dads, just another cooperative cover up with fake news put out by MSM. The depth of deception is alarming to say the least even though it is common knowledge BC doubled the child poverty rate from 1 in 10 to 1 in 5 in a decade, right through a booming economy.
After another 12 years of making sure all the right people knew about the atrocities committed on children by ignoring their best interest in favor of enriching government, BC ended child support claw backs. That's how things got humorous.
Those that favored enriching government fought the truth with, 'child support is for the children' which our corrupt media made sure swamped the truth which is, child support whenever possible is for the government.
Those that opposed us labeled us as women haters but that flew out the window with ending claw back because it really favored mothers... which really caused the feminist to get a hate on for me.
On the other fathers rights groups no longer considered my efforts as positive because it did help mothers, lol it hurts government coffers so they have no warm spot for me in their hearts either.
Now you have to admit that is very humorous, feminists have always portrayed my as an enemy, fathers groups will not support helping the children if mothers get more money and governments protecting their revenue generator consider me an enemy which means the whole system is their army. Now that is a humorous conclusion
I know, it looks like the odds are stacked against me when it comes to ending the practices that corrupted the justice system. Not so, during my days with the shared parenting group a large number of influential people continued to support the reasons the group was first formed, shared parenting, the best interests of the child. They continue to support choking off the corruption.Claimer.
Every statement on the children of divorce, plural, I have made in any of my blogs, is from data, studies and witness statements.
'Child support is for the children' is a lie. It is for the government and they take it from our most vulnerable children.
Childhood poverty is caused by dead beat dads is a lie. It is caused by dead beat governments stealing the child support.
The courts are gender bias is false, the courts are tax bias and use sole custody to increase that revenue.
The best interests of the child is a lie. Across the country there are hundreds of thousands of children forced to grow up in poverty caused by child support claw backs, the governments slice.
Poverty is the number 1 indicator of a criminal lifestyle, 80% of the youth in trouble with the law are from that category.
That is the core of the corruption no justice, no investment is designed to choke off.
BC ended claw backs in 2015, Ontario this January. Small steps for me but giant steps for the children of divorce.
vox
That's the gist of it, a lot more details in previous posts.
Fair warning, it isn't over and 2018 is not the winds that bring change..it is the 20 year storm that will destroy and signal the start of rebuilding the dysfunctional system.
A system destroyed by corruption has never fixed itself... ever... it was replaced.
vox
No comments:
Post a Comment