I have met and heard the tragic stories of many parents. PA is a function, by and large, of a custodial ex-partner, although some alienation can start while the couple is still together.

This blog is a story of experiences and observations of dysfunctional Family Law (FLAW), an arena pitting parent against parent, with children as the prize. Due to the gender bias in Family Law, that I have observed, this Blog has evolved from a focus solely on PA to one of the broader Family/Children's Rights area and the impact of Feminist mythology on Canadian Jurisprudence and the Divorce Industry.

Thursday, January 1, 2009

In Ireland dad’s group together to find solace and blunt their pain

Members of the Unmarried and Separated Fathers of Ireland group demonstrating in Dublin city centre yesterday. Marching through the capital's streets, they highlighted the trauma of not being able to spend Christmas with their sons and daughters. Photograph: Bryan O'Brien

Marchers draw attention to plight of fathers denied access to their children

KITTY HOLLAND

Mon, Dec 22, 2008

ABOUT 40 "Santas" marched through Dublin city centre yesterday to highlight the situation of separated fathers who will not see their children at Christmas.

The march, organised by the support organisation Unmarried and Separated Fathers of Ireland, drew much attention from onlookers as it made its way down Dame Street to College Green and on to Westmoreland Street.

Some of the Santas, on trumpet, drums, accordion and tambourine, played upbeat Christmas tunes such as Jingle Bells, as shop-workers came to shop doors to see what was going on. People laughed, took pictures and clapped, and passing motorists beeped their horns in approval.

Others on the march, which included women and some children, carried banners with such slogans as "A Dad is for Life, Not Just for Saturdays" and "When is a dad not a dad? When he's Irish".

As they reached O'Connell Street, the marchers stopped and gathered on the bridge where they lined up along the footpath.

They then dropped 20 Christmas wreaths into the Liffey, to remember fathers who had taken their own lives due to the pain of being separated from their children.

Ray Kelly, the founder of the group, said the tone of the march was upbeat but it had a serious message. "Every week a child's rights are abused when they are taken from their father. Fathers are taking their own lives because of what is happening to them. It is terrible that this is happening."

He said a major aim of the march was to "reach out" to fathers who were in difficulty, "to show them there is help, there is support - if not from us there are the Samaritans too".

Christmas was a time when fathers who could not see their children were particularly vulnerable. It was also a difficult time for paternal grandparents where the father had little or no access to his children. "If we save one life by doing this march and getting the message out about the support that's available, that's a job very well done today," he said.

Event co-ordinator Paul Mannion said he got involved with the organisation in March when he was being denied access to his two-year-old son.

"They just supported me. They have meetings every Monday night and it was a place I could go and just talk about my problems and open up a bit. I see my son now twice a week but I don't know how I would have got through it without the unmarried fathers."

Green Party councillor Ruairí Holohan said he was there because the party supported "all family structures whether married, unmarried or adoptive and we believe all should be treated equally before the law".

He said he was a separated father and was there with his young daughter.

The fathers' organisation can be contacted on 01-4514200 and 01-4514295 or at www.usfi.ie

© 2008 The Irish Times

Newsweek's lies about divorce

Newsweek's lies about divorce December 30, 2008 1:00 am Eastern

By Stephen Baskerville

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=84810

Divorce is the main cause of family destruction today, and fatherless children are the principal source of virtually every major social pathology. Yet divorce is ignored by the mainstream media to the point of blackout. Now, Newsweek magazine offers a revealing exception that proves the rule. Newsweek's depiction of divorce is so trite and clichéd that it seriously distorts what is happening.

Most Americans would be shocked if they knew what takes place today in the name of divorce. Indeed, millions are appalled when they discover that they can be forced into divorce, lose their children and even be jailed without trial – all without having violated any law and through procedures entirely beyond their control. Comprised of courts, bar associations and federally funded social services bureaucracies that wield police powers, the divorce machinery has become the most repressive and predatory sector of government ever created in the United States and today's greatest threat to constitutional freedom.

Yet, we hear not a word of this from Newsweek. As is de rigueur in journalism today, reporter Susanna Schrobsdorff begins not with objective facts or disinterested analysis but by publicly displaying her own divorce. And what a joyous occasion it was. Despite pretentious pathos (also obligatory in today's media), it is clear that no one forced her into this.

The usual assortment of divorce lawyers and feminists are then trotted out to mouth the standard clichés of the divorce industry: parents must "cooperate" and "put the children first," caring courts are now generous to fathers, etc. "Their dad and I had read the divorce books and rehearsed our speech about how none of this was their fault, that we loved them," she recounts. "All of this was true, but it seemed insufficient."

It was insufficient (by her own account, the children went berserk) because it was not true. Love demands we put the needs of those we claim to love before our own desires. If divorce proceeds from love, then the word has become meaningless.

Fifteen-year-old Amy Harris, quoted in the Sunday Times, offers a scathing rejoinder to Ms. Schrobsdorff's rehearsed speech: "Parents always say they are not leaving because of the children. Is that supposed to make the children feel better?" she asks.

Amy continues:

Does that take all the guilt off the child's shoulder? No, it's all rubbish. Children feel that they weren't enough to keep their parents, that their parents didn't love them enough to keep them together. I know I did not drive my father away, but I did not keep him either.

Newsweek offers no recognition that parents who oppose divorce in principle are simply divorced without their consent, whereupon their children (with everything else they have) are seized without any further reason given. What Newsweek presents as cooperation "for the children" in reality means "cooperate with the divorce if you ever want to see your children again."

The mendacity is especially glaring regarding fathers. "Changes in child-support laws, and a push by fathers for equal time, are transforming the way this generation of ex-spouses raise [sic] their children," claims the carefully worded headline. Yet, Newsweek provides no evidence of any such changes; in fact, it concedes that "Most often, children still end up living primarily with the mother" and that "moms are the official primary residential parent after a divorce in five out of six cases, a number that hasn't changed much since the mid-'90s."

One divorce lawyer claims that "most states have provisions that say gender can't be the determining factor in deciding who is going to be the primary custodial parent," but he does not tell us that such provisions are ignored.

The magazine's account of child support is likewise distorted. Advertised as providing for children who have been "abandoned" by their fathers, child support is in reality the financial engine driving divorce, offering generous windfalls to mothers who break their vows, while criminalizing fathers with debts most have done nothing to incur and that are far beyond their means.

"Most states have passed legislation that ties child-support payments to how much time a child spends with the nonresident parent paying the support," says Newsweek, commenting that "if a father spends more than a given threshold of nights with his kids, he can have his child support adjusted according to formulas that vary by state." No, what this means is that he is less likely to see his children, because both the mother and the state government will lose child support money. Both have a financial incentive to reduce his time with his children as much as possible. Child support makes children fatherless.

A lawyer from the American Academy of "Matrimonial" Lawyers claims that men want custody half the time so that they can pay half the support. This dishonest slur on fathers constitutes an open admission that child support payments vastly exceed the cost of raising children.

Divorce destroys many more families than same-sex "marriage" – which itself has arisen only because of the debasement of marriage through divorce. It is time for the responsible media to expose the unconstitutional divorce apparat. Otherwise, our professed concern for marriage and the family will ring hollow.

Stephen Baskerville © 2008