Fathers 4 Justice sets up chapter in Sault
A lot of dads beaten down by the system -- local father
Posted By CORINA MILIC, THE SAULT STAR
When his ex-wife accused him of abuse, stay-at-home dad Mike Murphy knew gaining custody of his 10-and 13-year-old daughters would be almost impossible "You're automatically an evil, hateful, abuser. People believe it, absolutely, unequivocally and you're toast, I'm toast," said Murphy, who insisted no evidence of actual abuse has ever been proven in three years of courtroom custody battles.
The current family law practice of doing what is in "the best interest of the child" really only serves the best interest of the mother, argued Murphy. "We hear a lot about dead beat dads, but a lot of these so-called dead beat dads have been beaten down by the system," he said. Murphy spent Thursday morning outside the court house on Queen Street protesting that system. Along with fellow dad Steven Plastino, he started a local chapter of Fathers 4 Justice earlier this week.
The international organization aims to make shared and equal custody a presumption in law. That means mom wouldn't get first dibs on the kids; parents would automatically get joint custody in most cases. Under the current system, joint custody doesn't guarantee anything, said Plastino. After the first two years of a 10-year battle, Plastino received joint custody of his children. Then his wife moved to St. Catharines and took their boys with her, he said. She moved at least seven times over the next several years, according to Plastino, making it impossible for him to fulfill his joint custody requirements of caring for the children at least 40 per cent of the time. "It's completely alienated us," he said. "It was a completely kangaroo court the way I see it -- as soon as I walked in there, I was fighting a losing battle to get access to my kids."
The men said they have both suffered from "parental alienation" - their ex-wives turning the children against them. While Murphy said he is slowly rebuilding his relationship with his girls, Plastino said he has not seen his sons in seven years.
Fathers 4 Justice is made up of men in similar situations and women who have been affected by those situations, usually paternal grandmothers, aunts and sisters.Group members often don superhero costumes and illegally hangbanners from buildings, bridges and even cranes to get their point across. The organization is currently on a cross-country campaign promoting its cause. The tour ends in Ottawa Oct. 7 in support of a private member's bill set for motion that day. MP Maurice Vellacott for Saskatoon- Wanuskewin plans to put forward a divorce law amendment for equal parenting, but with what looks like an election just around the corner, it's doubtful he will get the chance.
"If Mr. Vellacott gets re-elected, he'll bring it forward again. We'll just have to be patient and we are very patient," said Murphy. The idea of men's rights doesn't sit well with some. Murphy said the local F4J chapter has already been targeted.
A group of hackers claiming to be "man-hating women" busted onto the newly created f4j-soo.blogspot.com site, rigging an online poll. The poll's question, "Do you believe in equal and shared parenting as a presumption in law?" offered several tongue-in-cheek answers. Murphy claims the hackers spent over 22 hours voting for answer 4, "No. Men are innately incapable of such responsibility."
Several anonymous comments were also posted on the blog, demanding no fathers should be near their children. "Men are inherently violent and irresponsible people," one poster wrote.
Another wrote, "I hope rights for fathers are further stripped away. . . . Do you want dads out there diddling their kids? I didn't think so."
Copyright © 2008 The Sault Star
-
Anonymous said...
Steve's perverted view of what will happen to the so-called "hackers":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gh479t5itg -
- Anonymous said...
- I am appalled that women will stoop to such abhorrent behaviour. This behaviour has its roots in their prepubescent and teenage years where they quickly learn to use non-physical aggression. Women do tend to be very mean to each other but imagine a scenario where they team up to target their partners. This is actually happening. In a city like Sault Ste Marie, gossip no matter how true, is used to weaken their opponent at the outset. Shock and awe is their game....for a lot of men it still isn't working. As there are lots of men who are caught in the parental alienation cycle, we need to be just as studious as the women are. Women are shown to be more intelligent in specific ways, and they are the first to "get into the books" and we men need to be just as studious. This is the only way that we can prevail. It's unfortunate that in family law situations, the word "prevail" has to be used but most of the women I have had the misfortune of encountering see divorce as an "I win, you lose, you pay" scenario. This has to stop and will stop if and only if men stand up to this.
- Kevin said...
- After going through the court system two years ago and fighting to get visitation rights for my son Kyran, I am so very happy this has come to Sault Ste Marie. When I was struggling through things, I did look online to try to find support groups for fathers. Google searches only turned up support groups for women. The 'system' we have today allows mothers to turn the father of their children into nothing more than a pay check and has no regard whatsoever for rights of the father to see his kids, or the kids to see their dad. I eventually gave up all rights after fighting in court and bankrupting myself with nothing more than a useless court order (which she was able to completely ignore) to show for it. I think if this group had have been around two years ago, it may have been different. I look forward to seeing if I can assist in any way with the group.
Michael J. Murphy said...- Kevin:
I haven't yet started a regular monthly meeting but will when member numbers increase from the current amount. We are not a support group but focus on direct non violent action and sometimes Civil Disobediance.
I will likely be found at the courthouse most motion Thursdays (unless I'm actually having to defend a motion) and then I will be right in the courtroom. Motions usually start at 10:00 so I will likely be outside in a purple F4J t-shirt near one of the three entrances at 9:40-9:45 or so.
If you are able drop over - email first to ensure I'm going to be outside - and then we can chat.
I do know that my $20.00 membership fee is being well spent in terms of our advocacy and creating awareness of the plight of men in the family court system. You might want to consider buying a membership and even if you don't participate others, such as myself, will until the courts rule otherwise.
As long as we are men and want to have other children, even if marrying into them, we need to change the system or we will be subject to the misandry going on in family court for much longer.
Email me below and I will send some info off to you.
Best wishes
Mike Murphy
Coordinator, F4J Sault Ste. Marie
http://f4j-soo.blogspot.com/
f4j.sault.ste.marie@gmail.com
-
-
Anonymous #1 said... - What a disgusting idea. I hope rights for fathers are further stripped away - this sick effort is going to do nothing but spur a movement of child molesting fathers and allow resentful dads to employ the law to forcefully abduct the kids they have no right to be near. Do you want dads out there diddling their kids? I didn't think so.
- Anonymous # 2 said...
- I don't think men should really have any time with their kids unsupervised.
September 2, 2008 2:11 AM
- Anonymous #3 said...
- nice analysis. looks like somebody else learned psychology on a random geocities website! ~!~You Go Bro~~1 :)
- Anonymous # 4 said...
- Courts are put in place to protect Canadian citizens, especially children. It is with good reason that the Canadian legal system keeps fathers away from their children: Men are inherantly (sic) violent and irresponsible people. You can moan and complain about them being"biased" all you want, but the system will not change since they REALIZE childrens' saftey (sic) is at stake!
While I do not agree with "shared parenthood", I do agree that men should get 2 or 3 supervised hours of visitation with their children every week.
-
Michael J. Murphy said... - to Anonymous #1
- You appear to be pathologically impacted by some traumatic event. You have my sympathy for having such a distorted view of the world and men. I also sympathize with your children as they will obviously have relationship problems with men given the strength of your unhealthy views. I believe, as I have observed in my own dispute that serious counselling would be appropriate. Get some for the sake of your children.
-
Michael J. Murphy said...
- To anonymous # 2 You indicate "men" should not have access to children unless it is supervised. Do you really believe that all men should be grouped in such a negative light because of your experiences. What ever happened to the notion that men and women were equal. That is misandry which is not unlike saying all people of one race are bad because of one person. I do sympathize if you have had bad experiences with a man or some men. We are not all that bad. We are, like you, less than perfect but most men do love their children and want to do the best they can for them. I am writing a book on my experiences and will include these comments in it.
September 2, 2008 8:56 AM
-
Michael J. Murphy said...
- To anonymous #3 your quote --->
"nice analysis. looks like somebody else learned psychology on a random geocities website! ~!~You Go Bro~~1 :)"
Yours is an interesting comment in that you are likely a woman using rap talk. Intriguing.
I hope you have had a thorough look at the site and this is what I had hoped people would do.
Creating a dialogue is the first step toward a reasoned approach to important decisions.
Glad you could spend this much time here.
-
-
Michael J. Murphy said... to anonymous #4
- Thank you for your observation.
I will respectfully disagree with you. To cast all men with a broad brush such as you have would be called racist if you applied it to a visible minority. Surely some, indeed most of us, are not this way with our children?
But your comments make our case. The definition of bias is
A) preference or an inclination, especially one that inhibits impartial judgment.
B) An unfair act or policy stemming from prejudice
September 3, 2008 5:56 PM This comment is in response to my observation that the voting was being hacked and I would report it to their ISP's. This individual also commented above. Do you think they are a little miffed they got caught? hmmm....you be the judge.
- Anonymous #4 said... (same as above)
- I don't give a shit. Go ahead and report me to Interpol, NATO,or whoever the fuck it is you think gives a shit about mass voting on awebsite for butthurt (sic) dads. I eagerly anticipate the paragraph warningthat whatever ISP representative will copy-paste into an e-mail I getand never open. Cheers, mate.
-
Michael J. Murphy said...Well # 4
- This is the level of intelligence that victimizes men and can get away with it. Pity isn't it! :)
-
Michael J. Murphy said...
- This is a general note to dispel fears that someone, male or female, who is a provable danger to children would then be dealt with through the court process and, if warranted, would have no access or supervised access given the circumstances. Keep in mind this applies to either parent not just men. In my case my ex was the only parent to both physically and psychologically abuse the children. The family court gave the "hen house" to the "fox". Fathers-4-Justice Canada believes there should be a "presumption" of equality for shared parenting" but in no manner would assume someone who could be a danger gets it carte blanche. The following is a quote from an online petition at: "http://www.petitiononline.com/rpesp2ca/petition.html. If you haven't signed this petition do it now before you forget.
- "WHEREAS the vast majority of the public supports legislation which requires a presumption of equal shared parenting arrangements of children after divorce for those parents with no proven criminal abuse towards their children, and the Federal Special Joint Committee on Child Custody and Access supported equal shared parenting in its 1998 Report titled – ‘For The Sake Of The Children’,"
« Reply #1 on: Today at 01:51:30 PM »
Congratulations to you! I am so very happy to see such an organization started in our community, God knows we need it, not just here but throughout Canada! I was honestly shocked and disappointed when I went to your website and read the comments that were posted by annonymous 1 and 2. I have to wonder if I know exactly who those people are. It is a very unfortunate world that we are living in when a woman can take the father of her children to court and waste thousands of dollars that SHOULD be going towards the cost of raising children or could easily provide these children with a fantastic education. But rather "women" are using an unfair family court system to hurt and humiliate the fathers of thier children! And not only are they using the system to thier own revenge, but they are teaching our children the art of manipulation as well! I have dealt with this system for many years, not with children of my own, but instead as the stepmother who has had to watch as her husbands heart was ripped out and stomped everytime the first wife got a new boyfriend or felt that her children preferred their fathers affection over her own. I could never understand why a person would put her own children through so much hell, I could never understand how anyone could harbour so much hate within her heart and live a happy life. But I have seen the after effect, and I have witnessed what happens to these children that are raised to believe their father is a horrible person and the way these children learn to use the law to punish those whom they are angry with. I sit here everyday feeling as though my stepchildren have been abducted and are still missing, rather than face the fact that they finally found a way into the heart of their mother through lies and manipulation against their father. I try to remind myself that even through all of the fighting and court I still have very good memories of the first years I had with those children. But I cant happen but wonder, if the family court system was different, if only fathers had equal rights and PAS was a punishable offense, would I still have those children to love? The following is my response on the Sault News Forum.
-
New Blog for local Chapter of Fathers-4-Justice Canada
19 comments:
-
I don't give a shit. Go ahead and report me to Interpol, NATO, or whoever the fuck it is you think gives a shit about mass voting on a website for butthurt dads. I eagerly anticipate the paragraph warning that whatever ISP representative will copy-paste into an e-mail I get and never open. Cheers, mate.
- September 3, 2008 11:43 PM
-
This is the level of intelligence that victimizes men and can get away with it. Pity isn't it! :)
- September 3, 2008 11:47 PM
-
I hate men!
- September 4, 2008 12:01 AM
-
Yeah, down with men! I hate men SO much that not only am I going to deny them the right of parenthood, I'm also going to delete my cookies and vote on this random website over 2000 times. Heh. That's the power of WOMEN.
- September 4, 2008 12:07 AM
-
Tsk. Tsk. now girls - off too bed with you. Enough mischief for one day. Don't you think!!!!! :)
- September 4, 2008 12:11 AM
-
I think NATO is busy with a resurgent Russia right now. Sorry, I am off to conduct recon missions over Russia in my refurbished XB-70.
- September 4, 2008 12:21 AM
-
You know, I find all this ironic considering that F4J also has many women members who are proud to support equal parenting. And, as a male F4J member, I'd hate to say this, but after doing some research, I must declare myself a feminist. Feminism: n. 1. Belief in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes. 2. The movement organized around this belief. So, all you women who are true "Feminists", please contact your local F4J co-ordinator for more information about how you too can help support equal parenting rights for our children.
- September 4, 2008 2:41 PM
-
Sweet, I'm "hacker 1", dudebitches!
- September 4, 2008 3:19 PM
-
Gotta go to McDonald's because I have a mean hack att... I mean Big Mac attack.
- September 4, 2008 3:22 PM
-
Remember when the computing elite underground decided to extend the definition of hacking to include "mass voting on some gay poll"? Wait, shit, I must be off in space on fucking LSD, because you'd have to be functionally retarded to make the connection between compromising system security and producing dissenting votes on a blog poll. Those ISPs will be a-roarin' to kick some ass when they get a load of people voting on polls. I'll totally be blacklisted and never get Internet service in this town again. Good work, sheriff Internet Dad!
- September 4, 2008 3:25 PM
- This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
- September 4, 2008 3:39 PM
-
Please stop disrupting our communications. Disrupting communications on this channel with spam will not be tolerated. Cyber bullying will not be tolerated. I will personally make certain that hate crimes will be dealt with to the fullest extent of the law and that those responsible, will be held responsible. You're not dealing with noobs any more. SP
- September 4, 2008 4:02 PM
-
So we have the Hague in on this now? Anyways, I stand by my opinion that dads should not be allowed to have custody of their children.
- September 4, 2008 11:21 PM
-
I'm not dealing with "noobs", is it? I'd like to step back from sarcastic remarks and at least offer you the charitable motion of a recount on what all has gone down here on the F4J blog - a bunch of votes were made en masse. Now, if you can find a way to qualify mass voting on a blog as a hate crime, you should probably be exploiting your quixotic litigation abilities in more substantial areas than defending the plight of some miserable old men whining on the Internet. Seriously, if you want to fight a war against "hate crimes", maybe quit the laughable Internet tough guy act and start with the misogynistic crowd that run this website and are so blind to reality that they can't even entertain the notion that this voting was done by anybody other than women who want nothing more than to blissfully abuse their ex-husbands by forcing them into hopeless exile from their children. People this high-strung are, at best, potential timebombs. Second, any remarks I have made on this blog are limited to mocking even the absurd concept of there being any trouble over the multitude of votes on this blog. Third, if in Neverland, you were to embark on a magical quest and successfully found a way to somehow convince somebody to waste our tax money and public services into looking into thse imaginary hate crimes (and honestly, they are completely imaginary - where are they? What are you even talking about?), I have absolutely no doubt that with even my dog representing me, I would have little trouble passing any of this off as the clear parody it all is, or having any case dismissed outright on the sheer absurdity of trying to litigate me on such idiotic grounds.
- September 4, 2008 11:40 PM
-
G'night Hacker 3 - Get some sleep the blog will be here tomorrow for you to rant on about. Love ya babe!!!!! :)
- September 4, 2008 11:59 PM
-
Well, he own hatred of mothers is shining through! He it it immediately jumped aboard the mother-hating bandwaggon upon recieving the tiniest dose of criticism - which, I might add, is allowed under the charter.
- September 5, 2008 12:03 AM
-
Shift change! Hacker 2 signing in for own graveyard shift. Me hate men, etc.
- September 5, 2008 12:43 AM
-
Figured I'd just drop by and leave a few words, more or less so you can continue to cackle and salivate over some new meaningless logs of my visits here. Cheers~! Also, thought I'd remind everybody that my IP address is 24.109.38.7, if the dossier on my connections desparately posted all over this blog had slipped your mind or something. Oh yeah, almost forgot - down with men, my chromosomes are superior, generic demoralizing statements, etc.
- September 5, 2008 3:22 AM
-
Steve: The definition of feminisim has gotten lost in the haze over the years but you are right. it is incumbent to use a new term rather than slight true feminists. They, after all, want what we want. On the Soo News forum one poster calls them femi-nazis. It has a ring that resonates and gets attention but may be a little extreme in our blog where we want civil discourse rather than hatred and invective. The term though works well over a pint of Guinness at the pub when conversing and doing cool stuff like male bonding. I need to do more of that. They are misandrists or suffer from misandry so I'm inventing a new word today You've seen it for the first time ever right here - right now. It is a combination of Misandry and Female. Misandry means simply "Hatred of men" and we know what female means. I will leave feminist out completely as it is insulting to them to have our hacker visitors referred in that manner. This is not meant as a slight to females. I adore women and having been a stay-at-home dad for 10 years. I identify strongly with them. Where would the world be without you helping to keep us in line. I do have a "beef" with my ex but that is another story. The new word is misanderfem. Its definition is "a female who hates men so much they will do anything including lying, cheating, stealing, psychologically damage children, and when necessary beat up on males to suit their agenda." This is an "open source" definition so others can make contributions. This is not a complimentary term by any stretch but it describes them better than feminist which is a touch too complimentary. Have a lovely day. :) note: slightly modified from the original which I deleted but consistent with the one posted on the Soo News forum this AM.
- September 5, 2008 9:55 AM
- Anonymous #1 said...
- What a disgusting idea. I hope rights for fathers are further stripped away - this sick effort is going to do nothing but spur a movement of child molesting fathers and allow resentful dads to employ the law to forcefully abduct the kids they have no right to be near. Do you want dads out there diddling their kids? I didn't think so.
- Anonymous # 2 said...
- I don't think men should really have any time with their kids unsupervised.
September 2, 2008 2:11 AM
- Anonymous #3 said...
- nice analysis. looks like somebody else learned psychology on a random geocities website! ~!~You Go Bro~~1 :)
- Anonymous # 4 said...
- Courts are put in place to protect Canadian citizens, especially children. It is with good reason that the Canadian legal system keeps fathers away from their children: Men are inherantly (sic) violent and irresponsible people. You can moan and complain about them being"biased" all you want, but the system will not change since they REALIZE childrens' saftey (sic) is at stake! While I do not agree with "shared parenthood", I do agree that men should get 2 or 3 supervised hours of visitation with their children every week.
-
Michael J. Murphy said...
- to Anonymous #1
- You appear to be pathologically impacted by some traumatic event. You have my sympathy for having such a distorted view of the world and men. I also sympathize with your children as they will obviously have relationship problems with men given the strength of your unhealthy views. I believe, as I do for my ex, you need serious counselling. Get some for the sake of your children.
-
Michael J. Murphy said...
- To anonymous # 2 You indicate "men" should not have access to children unless it is supervised. Do you really believe that all men should be grouped in such a negative light because of your experiences. What ever happened to the notion that men and women were equal. That is misandry which is not unlike saying all people of one race are bad because of one person. I do sympathize if you have had bad experiences with a man or some men. We are not all that bad. We are, like you, less than perfect but most men do love their children and want to do the best they can for them. I am writing a book on my experiences and will include these comments in it. If you want to see the prologue to the book visit here: http://parentalalienationcanada.blogspot.com.
September 2, 2008 8:56 AM
-
Michael J. Murphy said...
- To anonymous #3 your quote ---> "nice analysis. looks like somebody else learned psychology on a random geocities website! ~!~You Go Bro~~1 :)" Yours is an interesting comment in that you are likely a woman using rap talk. Intriguing. I hope you have had a thorough look at the site and this is what I had hoped people would do. Creating a dialogue is the first step toward a reasoned approach to important decisions. Glad you could spend this much time here.
-
Michael J. Murphy said... to anonymous #4
- Thank you for your observation.
I will respectfully disagree with you. To cast all men with a broad brush such as you have would be called racist if you applied it to a visible minority. Surely some, indeed most of us, are not this way with our children?
But your comments make our case. The definition of bias is
A) preference or an inclination, especially one that inhibits impartial judgment.
B) An unfair act or policy stemming from prejudice
September 3, 2008 5:56 PM This comment is in response to my observation that the voting was being hacked and I would report it to their ISP's. This individual also commented above. Do you think they are a little miffed they got caught? hmmm....you be the judge.
- Anonymous #4 said... (same as above)
- I don't give a shit. Go ahead and report me to Interpol, NATO, or whoever the fuck it is you think gives a shit about mass voting on a website for butthurt (sic) dads. I eagerly anticipate the paragraph warning that whatever ISP representative will copy-paste into an e-mail I get and never open. Cheers, mate.
-
Michael J. Murphy said...Well # 4
- This is the level of intelligence that victimizes men and can get away with it. Pity isn't it! :)
-
-
Michael J. Murphy said...
- This is a general note to dispel fears that someone, male or female, who is a provable danger to children would then be dealt with through the court process and, if warranted, would have no access or supervised access given the circumstances. Keep in mind this applies to either parent not just men. In my case my ex was the only parent to both physically and psychologically abuse the children. The family court gave the "hen house" to the "fox". Fathers-4-Justice Canada believes there should be a "presumption" of equality for shared parenting" but in no manner would assume someone who could be a danger gets it carte blanche. The following is a quote from an online petition at: "http://www.petitiononline.com/rpesp2ca/petition.html. If you haven't signed this petition do it now before you forget.
- "WHEREAS the vast majority of the public supports legislation which requires a presumption of equal shared parenting arrangements of children after divorce for those parents with no proven criminal abuse towards their children, and the Federal Special Joint Committee on Child Custody and Access supported equal shared parenting in its 1998 Report titled – ‘For The Sake Of The Children’,"
| ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
Mens Studies to make history
Mens Studies to make history
Climate Information Widget
If you are a warmist or an AGW skeptic like me here is a little info on the last 30 years or so. Click the widget for more info and explanation.
Feeds on Family Law and DV Issues Worldwide
Fatherhood ~ The Best Job on the Planet
The Canadian Father Involvement Initiative
Subscribe
Posts
All Comments
Search my blogs with a custom keyword search by Google
Profile
- Michael J. Murphy
- Sault Ste. Marie, ON, Canada
- I am Politically active and right of centre on most issues with the odd exception such as legalization of "Mary Jane". I advocate on changes to Family Law - an incredibly dysfunctional arena where parents are pitted against one another and children are the victims. My picture will sometimes show me as a younger man simply because I like them.
An Alienated Child
Is a troubled child
American Coalition for Fathers & Children Petition
