October 25th is the tenth birthday of a sweet little girl who likes soccer, gymnastics and books. She has worked on elections and she had fed the ducks in the picture herself.Unfortunately, she has not seen one of her parents in more than two years. This is even though she still loved and wanted to see her lost/forgotten parent the last time they were together in 2004.
Why do they not see one another? Was she hurt or in danger? No.
Did the forgotten parent want to see her? Yes. Why then?
It has been the preference of another parent to make it this way. No judge had to be consulted to make it this way. This is quite common following marital conflict and/or a divorce as this article from the National Post explains. And, there is no accessible, timely or affordable way to resolve such a situation. Only the court has the opportunity to fix situations such as this and courts are slow and expensive.
It is not that hard to imagine how this could happen to someone you know, right? In Canadian family law, an absence of federal policy allows "primary caregivers" the discretion to remove their children from co-parenting situations without any immediate accountability. This happens even if there is an another motive. This is even if one parent has a vested interest in causing pain to the other parent for self-interested reasons (rather than the children's best interests). The State through the Court may verify they are acting in the children's best interest later, but only if someone is willing to pay.
In most provinces it takes years to get a family court date and/or an adjudicated decision by a judge to enforce the access rights of children and non-residential parents. Unfortunately, legal fees to fix such problems and child support, which needs to be paid in the meantime, are both due in “after tax” dollars.
Most forgotten parents just drop out, give up. Instead, they may possibly resume their relationships with these children when the children grow up and look for answers and to deal with the emotional problems that are commonly associated with this type of situation.
Who wins in the meantime? The status quo, the lawyers and other special interests.
How can this be?
The Liberal party (and now the Conservatives), have not made changes to the Divorce Act to help parents and children and blended families with their relationships after divorce, in spite of recommendations by federal commissions in 1998 and 2002.
In the honour of this girl’s 10th birthday, I republish Sinestra’s now famous policy resolution unanimously passed by the Quebec Women’s Commission. It became Liberal policy at the Quebec General Council in November of 2005 but it fell off the radar this time around even though children’s rights are in “limbo” and are not being holistically upheld in Canada.
Enjoy!
Resolution on the Right of the Child to Have Meaningful Access to Both Parents
Whereas the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child stipulates that children should have access to family members;
Whereas it is in the best interest of the child to have access to and strong relationships with both parents;
Whereas the federal government has not implemented policy that is in the best interest of the child or the blended family, despite reports in 1998 and 2002;
Whereas non-residential parents can be unilaterally and with no involvement of a higher authority denied access to their children without adequate, timely or accessible remedies.
Whereas the federal government had prioritized child support and remains inactive on child access;
Whereas children and their non-residential families stagnate under lopsided policy priorities;
Whereas the provinces administer and interpret the federal Divorce Act, with long delays and inadequate remedies to child access issues that hurt child-parent
relationships;
Therefore be it resolved that the Liberal Party of Canada urge the Government of Canada to implement policy prioritizing access and protecting the rights of children to have access to both parents.
be it further resolved that the Liberal Party of Canada urge the Government of Canada to implement policy giving equal weight to relationship support between parents and children as to financial support.
be it further resolved that the Liberal Party of Canada urge the Government of Canada to create standards and legislation to support provincial and territorial governments in the enforcement of child access similar to those set up previously to support the enforcement of child support.
Many Liberals still yearn for a just society. Happy birthday big girl! Maybe next year.
4 comments:
Ignatieff (who went through a similar situation in the early 90's) has written about child custody in "The Rights Revolution." It's not a policy prescription, as it isn't a platform (written before he was in politics), but you might want to check it out. Regardless of who you like in the race, I'd be willing to guess he's one of the few to have considered this much.
Great. He'd make a more effective Minister of Justice than the other Liberals before him.
You could have put a scary amount of money into Court proceedings, yet end up with the same results. Parental alienation is at best labeled unbelievable false theory by the judges, at worst worth of heavy sanctioning following a mere hint that it may be in place. And there are a myriad of possibilities in between.
I wish I could encourage you, but we've lost faith ourselves, my spouse and I, after nine years of battle and the loss of a child and a half. This reality is creepy, destroying, and dangerous for the ability to healthily relate intimately with the future lovers of the children involved.
You do good to speak it up publicly. Many do, many don't. Seems like it will take a long time before the fathers are heard without that half ironic smile and dismissal by the listeners in power. Many, unfortunately, have already chosen a quiet retreat to the land of eternal sleep, broken, rejected, unable to keep up with the ensuing vacuuming of their resources that a vengeful mother can impose on them, with the fatherly help of our blind justice system.
A second spouse shouldering the fathers' cause. Good luck.
Post a Comment