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.

Friday, April 3, 2009

Globe and Mail ~ Flouting custody orders to cost mother $35,000

My comments left on the Globe & Mail Site: You (Mike Murphy, from Sault Ste. Marie, ON, Canada) wrote: We have on this thread some discussion on the relative propensity for violence by both genders. In Canada and the USA it is pretty much equal. Women, because of size differences, make up by using weapons. When you have been attacked with a 4.5 foot rake handle or a 10lb jug of water bounces off your head you will then know a female can pack a lethal dose of aggression. Females also resort to far more subtle and less obvious emotional and financial abuse. For those who don't think women are killers you haven't read the news recently about the woman in Edmonton who punched, kicked, knocked down and punched again causing her partner to die 5 days later. This one won't even show up as DV in Stats Can reports. Yesterday we saw the reports of the mom who may have killed her two children in Quebec. What you may not know is that in the USA and Australia moms are the fiercest predators of children. By a wide margin they kill and abuse children compared to dads. Lesbians have a 40% higher rate of DV than hetero couples. Those who feel so self righteous about female initiated violence as less problematic really don't know what is going on and are acting like gender feminist spin doctors. The dad in this case spent $350,000.00 on legal fees and expenses to try and maintain a relationship with his children. He is a rare man who has both the financial wherewithal and emotional resources to tackle a sociopathic, narcissistic mom. She will likely appeal the decision so it may not be over yet. $35,000.00 is a minuscule amount of payment for a decade of child and spousal abuse. PA is not only severe child abuse it is horrendous spousal abuse on the target. I have seen a slight wiggle in the pendulum which sets itself at the far left of its swing in favour of custody and support matters in Family Law (FLAW) toward moms. Advocacy by men and women who are living or observing inequities must grow and be heard. Moms and dads both alienate. It must stop for the sake of the children.

KIRK MAKIN

From Friday's Globe and Mail

April 3, 2009 at 4:16 AM EDT

JUSTICE REPORTER

***

A 42-year-old Toronto mother has been fined more than $35,000 for systematically alienating her three daughters from their father after the couple's marriage broke down.

In making the unusually harsh ruling, Madam Justice Faye McWatt of the Ontario Superior Court said that the woman - a chiropodist identified only as K.D. - blithely flouted a series of court orders aimed at restoring her children's relationship with their father.

"The respondent came to this court time and time again and consented to orders in question," Judge McWatt said. "Once she left this building, she ignored the orders, believing that she could escape scrutiny. The evidence of her contempts is overwhelming."

The ruling was the second stage of a decision Judge McWatt started last year when she ordered that the three girls be seized, sent to a parental alienation centre in the United States for deprogramming and prevented from communicating with their mother.

The children - aged 14, 11 and 9 - now live in the sole custody of their father.

"At the end of the day this was a case about a parent who did not care about what was best for her children," the father's lawyer, Harold Niman, said in an interview yesterday. "The contempt findings and penalties will hopefully make it clear to other like-minded parents that orders are to be taken seriously - and there are consequences to those parents who ignore them."

Soon after the couple met in 1993, K.D. became pregnant. While K.D. attempted to keep the father from seeing his first daughter, she eventually agreed to marry him. The couple soon split up, but had two more children during brief periods of reunification.

Judge McWatt categorically rejected the mother's assertion that she was not to blame for anything, and that the children had unilaterally refused to associate with their father, a 56-year-old vascular surgeon identified as A.L.

"There is really only one explanation for the children's attitudes," she said. "It is their mother's consistent negative influence on them from their early childhood about A.L., and her persistence in excluding them from his children's lives."

Judge McWatt noted that a total of six judges had issued orders in the long-running case - and virtually none of them were honoured.

As early as 2000, she said Madam Justice Mary Lou Benotto of the Ontario Superior Court had warned that "each day that goes by creates more and more risk that these children will be further alienated from their father and consequently permanently harmed."

However, K.D. carried right on cancelling sleepovers that were planned at the father's house, or vacation trips to New York, Quebec City and Niagara Falls. K.D. even refused to let him drive the children to school unless she was in the car as well, Judge McWatt said.

She said the children lost the capacity to make independent decisions about interacting with their father. In her 2008 order, Judge McWatt said K.D. must turn over the children's clothing, passports and possessions. K.D. was also ordered not to harass the children or go within 300 metres of them.

Judge McWatt described the mother as immature, evasive and completely lacking credibility. She said K.D. precipitated physical confrontations with her husband and berated him in front of the children. Eventually, the father was reduced to shouting good night to his children through a door at his estranged wife's home in the hope that they were there and could hear him.

Flouting custody orders to cost mother $35,000

KIRK MAKIN

From Friday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 7:44 AM EDT 03/04/09

Flouting custody orders to cost woman $35,000 ...Read the full article

This conversation is semi-moderated What is moderation? | How do I report a comment?

  1. pants 7 from Japan writes: It would take the deep pockets of a surgeon for a man to get this kind of justice. Anecdotely, I have heard of many such cases in Canada but the fathers can't afford the legal fees to go to court three times and just give up.
  2. Jose Penalidade from Dont forget the wallet, Canada writes: We don't know what king of man AL is, but the mother to use her own children as a weapon in a marriage that is splitting up, must have been very traumatic for the children. Having three daughters myself, I can't image not having access to them, and not sharing in their growth. Fathers, have an important role in the growth of a daughter, ie; the relationships they will have with men, will be based on how their father behaves within their own lives. I am happy their mother understands that.
  3. Lamont Lamont from Canada writes: Why was she not jailed for contempt of court. That is what happens to thousands of fathers in this country who ignore court orders. Lock her up for a good stretch.
  4. Sanjay Ali O'Toole-Wong from Mississauga, Canada writes: Wow, only had to get to a 7th judge too. The Canadian legal system is a wonder to behold.
  5. Anesthesiologiste . from Toronto, Canada writes: A.L., your daughters have a wonderful father. Your honourable actions through these many years have shown them that they are loved by you, and that your connection with them should not and cannot be broken by their mother. I'm glad to read that the courts have given you custody. I hope that you and your girls are able to fully repair the rupture that you have suffered through. All the best. CL
  6. Paul F. from Toronto, Canada writes: Actually, one has to wonder how this ISN'T child abuse? Why is she facing only civil sanction here? She is seriously messed up. It's pretty hard to argue the legal system does have a bias against the father. It is only the persistence of the father that he managed AFTER 7 judges to have the kids rescued from their lunatic mother is very telling. Having said that, the story is a little weird. Why would he have two more children with this woman after she tried to prevent him having access to their first child? To say that some people don't learn is an understatement here.
  7. Squish_a_p From BC from Canada writes: As a mom, my children and I went through this with their father, who did not have custody and abandoned them to move to BC to evade court ordered child support. The kids step father was so good to them and that made him angry too. I only wish I had had the money to keep going back to court. My relationship with my 29 and 25 year old children is damaged by his vindictiveness, hopefully not permanently. It breaks my heart. Every hour I would have spent with a lawyer would have taken a weeks worth of groceries off our table.
  8. Wayne Morrison from Toronto, Canada writes: This is only an anecdotal guess, but I doubt if a male judge would have dealt as harshly with this woman. She got what she deserved, but it likely took a female judge to be the one who pulled her up short.
  9. Frosty 08Ltd from Canada writes: Episodes like these are just baby steps forward for custody equality. I'm heartened to read that the father has custody, but saddened to read that the mother's penaltiies were only fiscal. She should have to face the same full-force sentencing that the father would have faced for disregarding years of court ORDERS. A good friend of mine still rails against the injustice done to him by an ex-spouse who cheated, lied and then left... all the while working to poison the mindset of their son against him. The mother routinely makes up her own custody arrangements for the week, which is the opposite of the ruled-upon custody agreement. Until women are held to the letter of the law with the same energy that judges use to vilify men, justice will never truly be served.
  10. George Nikitin from Hamilton, Canada writes: Pants 7: We get all the justice we can afford in North America (see OJ Simpson).
  11. Tossed Salada from Canada writes: I realize for the good of the children that the name of this psychotic cannot be published. But I sure would like to know because I am not going anywhere near her office. I have a pretty good idea who it is. Having said that I have contacted the chiropractic association of Ontario to determine if she has violated any of their code of ethics (she has) and what they are doing about it (probably nothing). Purveyors of PSA are the lowest of the low and should be dealt with harshly. In this case jail time and intense psychological counseling is needed.
  12. North Star from Canada writes: Sanjay Ali O'Toole-Wong from Mississauga, Canada writes: Wow, only had to get to a 7th judge too. The Canadian legal system is a wonder to behold. ------ If the genders were reversed, it would have likely gone much faster
  13. cyan blue from Canada writes: What we are not told is how the court orders split the time between Mom and Dad. I suspect parental alienation by the courts is inconveniently common. I have a five-year old distant relative for whom time with his father was awarded only each Wednesday and every other weekend, and among other things he states with complete certainty that 'my Daddy has no brains.' The Family Court system has split his time unevenly, mostly with the mother and in her anger the dominant carer has brainwashed this young boy and removed any sense of male self-esteem or male identity. In my opinion this kid is now a train wreck waiting to happen. I see in him absolutely no interest in reading, I see no empathy, I only see anger and violence. Courts 1. Society 0
  14. N Dawg from Canada writes: Unfortunately, this is only the tip of the iceberg. Men are routinely denied access to their children. Men pay alimony to women who refuse to work. Men pay child support for children they are refused access to. This guy obviously has deep pockets to be able to keep going back to the courts. Not all men are this lucky.
  15. Blaque Jacque Shallaque from Canada writes: What a sad story. We can dream that one day parents of the two sexes will have equality before the law, but the currently reality seems infinitely far from that dream.
  16. Kevin Desmoulin from TO, Canada writes: As a man, who would want to fight over their children with the mother of these children, Not a fight I think most men or most people want to engage in. Never mind money, it is easy to see why people just give up.
  17. Can't believe it from Canada writes: It only took nine years to get that ruling.........my how the wheels of justice turn!! Painfully slow in these cases...but unbelievably swift if you get caught in criminal activity, and the evidence is all against you!!
  18. J M from Toronto, Canada writes: My parents split up in the 70s and my mother took us so that my father would not know where we were. After a messy custody dispute, my father was awarded custody. I can say from experience that mothers that try to alienate their children from their father are emotionally abusing them and setting up their children to have poor perceptions of relationships. Kids are vulnerable, impressionable and try to please whoever has them. They don't make mature informed choices because they are children. The primary role of a parent is to give care and foster healthy development. When you engage in these type of activities you are not living up to your role and obligations.
  19. Diane Schweik from Edmonton, Canada writes: . Is she a chiropodist or a chiropractor ? Podiatrist is usually used for the former here. I think jail time would have been appropriate here for all the years of abuse of these kids.
  20. Ryan Ginger from Canada writes: This woman was seriously messed up in the head.
  21. S.C. Davidson from Canada writes: My daughter tells her daughter that daddy is a good guy and loves her very much. She sees her father week nights and every other weekend. Homework, if any, is done so they can have quality time together. She comes home and asks what a crack whore is and why does daddy call mommy that. The kid is six and goes through this every time. My daughter explains that daddy and mommy can't get along and daddy is angry with mommy not her. How long does this crap have to go on before this little girl is affected? In this case, the mother should have been stopped and jailed years ago. If genders were reversed this would have been solved a lot sooner.
  22. paulo the seer from waterloo, Canada writes: What a joke. She risked alienating her kids from the father ... so now she is barred from seeing her kids. Oh wait ... the father is a surgeon. Wonder who had the better legal representation?
  23. joe mckenzie from Canada writes: Its about time the courts did something like this. I am in a similar situation with an ex-wife that continually obstructs me from trying to be a great father to my kids. The physical threats, yelling and berating in front of the kids is all too familiar. In my view the Ontario courts have a built in prejudice against fathers who love their kids, and want to spend time with them.
  24. Watercooler Pundit from Regina, Canada writes: It is just nice to see the father come on top of any situation. I know from experience that the courts are Draconian in their views of parenting and custody. Sounds like that mother needs a mental health practitioner.
  25. Tossed Salada from Canada writes: joe mckenzie: In my view the Ontario courts have a built in prejudice against fathers who love their kids, and want to spend time with them. ******************************************************* Of course they do joe. One suspects that the judges were appointed during The Affirmative Action Party' (NDP) tenure. You know the apologist party who tried to make up for all those years of the patriarchy by marginalizing men. If a few children got hurt in the process, oh well can't be helped. This is war you know.
  26. I notice everything from Calgary, Canada writes: I'm not taking the woman's side--she is clearly mentally unhinged--but the man (a vascular surgeon no less) sounds as if not all his dogs are barking either.
  27. Donald Wilson from Canada writes: Finally at long last - some real justice - but at a great cost - perhaps the $ 35,000.00 award ( if he ever gets it ) will offset the legal bills . And at a great cost to the children - they may be damaged forever by the mother's actions . Children really have few rights in front of a judge and usually no representation nor say in these matters . The adults ( so called ) make all the requests and wants , and the adults decide , thinking they know what the child or children ( who isn't in court ) wants . In reality the adults are saying what they want and is that convienent to the adults . There will be no justice nor reality for children until the system changes to consider them in real time . Testifying in front of the parents puts terrible stress on the child and will force the child to say whatever he/she thinks will keep a roof overhead and food to eat . There is a better way but most judges haven't figured that out yet .
  28. John Piercy from Canada writes: Having paid Child Support since 1994 and have had no contact since 1996 with my only child I can see many similarities between K.D. and my ex girlfriend. Women with full custody , use that position to against there ex's to further widen the gap between Father and Daughter . One can only imagine the physical toll and emotional toll this creates in this fathers situation . I gave up a long time . Unable to pay Child Support and Lawyers costs to fight each time I wanted to visit .
  29. r w from Canada writes: Wish I had that judge 15 years ago. Never as bad as this story, but the the theme sounds very familiar
  30. Rollo 8>) from Belgium writes: Diane Schweik from Edmonton, Canada writes: I think jail time would have been appropriate here for all the years of abuse of these kids. ---------------------------------------- Agreed, send a message loud and clear that everyone could understand. 35k is meaningless by itself. Yet the judgement was 'extrememly harsh,' for whom, the father because she got off so lightly?
  31. Eve Chartrand from Canada writes: 'perhaps the $ 35,000.00 award ( if he ever gets it ) will offset the legal bills ' Not likely. Not even close. Not even in the neighborhood for this kind of battle.
  32. Jim Mohagan from Funkytown, Canada writes: Well it's about time. Mothers withholding and denying access of children to their fathers is rampant in Canada. This is because all 13 provinces and territories have government agencies dedicated to collecting court-ordered child support from 'non-custodial parents' (a euphemism for 'father') while NONE have an agency to enforce custody and access orders. They're not worth the paper they're printed on. The reality is 99% of disenfranchised don't have the resources to fight this in court as A.L. did. Children are routinely separated and alienated from their fathers with the active assistance of family courts. Until the presumption of equal parenting is established as a bedrock principle of family law and actually ENFORCED, this tragedy will continue.
  33. Mike Quinlan from Gatineau, Canada writes: Donald, I would say the children were damaged. This took nine years, effectively half their childhood. What I find unfortunate is that our legal system is not only slow, but unaware of the additional harm it creates for victims.
  34. Humble Opinion from TO, Canada writes: If you really don't like it, rock the kazba!
  35. The Dupes from Ottawa, Canada writes: So to all of you out there thinking of divorce. Hopefully this story will make you think twice and perhaps make you realize that the grass is not always greener on the other side of the fence. Personallly, I think they should make marriage councilling an obligation. As well, prior to getting married, A thorough psychological and compatibility test should be passed by both future parents. This would save us a lot of court costs and broken hearts.
  36. Buddy Canada from Canada writes: This is sad for the children and the Father but it was nice for once to hear of a Female Judge honouring the rights of a Father. Too often they are ignored.
  37. Whatever Canadian from Canada writes: Unfortunately what people in general overlook is that this kind of damage suffered by kids at times is damaging to the next generation as well. My late wife saw the fights between her parents and then suffered from the years of alienation from father and bad mouthing that her mother directed towards her father. Even when she was married her mother would get into hours of tirade about what happened to her in the past. I could clearly see how my wife was emotionally affected after each such episode and how that poisoned our marriage. Research will tell you that girls who have good relationship with their father also become good wives and mothers to their sons. Unfortunately I did not knowthat at the time. For the sake of kids I managed to hang on and our marriage though very shaky at times survived.
  38. w b from Canada writes: Hello, Thank God that guy was a doctor and makes tons of money. In these situations most guys would be broke, missing payments (working extra jobs) being hauld to court to make more payments, not seeing his kids, and the mother would still be crazy and messing the kids up. I am going through a divorce where I as a man experience physical, verbal, emotional abuse (infront of my young children) and nothing has happened. The only thing that has happened is my money is gone, I fight to see my kids (and to be heard, change perception of people that Dads are parents and can take full care of children). I also reflect upon the fact that this guys case took years.....what a joke. If this situation was the other way around, the women would have won 6 years ago and the Man would be in jail and his kids would be getting messed. If the courts truely take into consideration the kids first...why did it take so long. Why are the courts so one sided? Equal justice for men please! Thank you.
  39. Susan Cain from Brampton On, Canada writes: This behaviour among women is not uncommon. They have been given the misguided impression that they have the support of the courts and women's groups to behave in ways that are absolutely incredulous. The truly sad outcome is that the child and the non custodial parent loose out. Unless you have very deep pockets you only get the kind of justice you can afford. Winner here is the lawyer. This is not justice, I can't think of a word that describes it but it is certainly not justice. Men need to collectively form a strong movement that gets some press to show the other side of this sad affair. And please do post about the dead beat dad's they do not make up the majority, need I mention those women who cruise the bars looking for a one night stand to only end up pregnant and not know who the real father is. It goes both ways. The number of young girls pushing strollers who should still be in school but having kids and living off the system are another concern but that discussion is for another day.
  40. Jennifer Georgas from etobicoke, Canada writes: This mother's behaviour is completely reprehensible. As a married mother of two beautiful girls who have a fabulous father, I can conceive of circumstances that would make me very angry with him, but never would I allow that to colour my children's relationship with their father. Unfortunatly I have to agree that the outcome would have been different (and arrived at in a shorter period of time) had the gender roles been reversed. Our courts need to look at the circumstances of a dispute, rather than the genders of the players involved. All of my family's best wishes to the father and his daughters for a calm, loving future.
  41. Being Canadian from Canada writes: Too bad the sentence is 'unusually harsh'. This is not a 'mother' but a destructive sociopath who should be imprisoned in a mental facility for the rest of her days.
  42. Boreal Moose from Canada writes: Susan Cain from Brampton On, Canada writes: Men need to collectively form a strong movement that gets some press to show the other side of this sad affair. And please do post about the dead beat dad's they do not make up the majority.... _____________________ They do not make up the majority of Dad's. They do, however, make up the vast majority of deadbeat parents and spouse- beaters. I'm happy this fellow finally got to seen the light at the end of a dark tunnel, but lets not get carried away here. Ask the cop who terrorizes whom on a more regular basis? I aint never heard a no men's shelter!
  43. paulo the seer from waterloo, Canada writes: This woman has been badly wronged by her husband. He has 3 kids by her, then runs off to have his fun. Single mother working hard to bring up her kids, and she has to deal with a deadbeat father as well ??? Oh wait, he's a surgeon. Yep, he had the expensive lawyers.
  44. C P from Canada writes: What the courts need to do are, especially with highly emotionally charged cases, have a 3 judge panel that decides on custody of children. A judge may come in to a courtroom and be having a bad day for their own personal reasons and make a rash judgment that will affect the lives of children forever. My ex was not able to see his son anymore because his ex went to the courts and claimed she feared he would take his child out of the country and got a restraint order. He was a student, working and in a relationship with me and no intention of returning to the country that he fled because of poor economic conditions and health care. He tried to fight the order, even with a lawyer from one of the top firms in the country, and kept getting shut down every time by a judge that obviously wasn't interested in the full details of the case. Let's just say that the aftermath of all this was not pleasant and left two families ruined.
  45. margaret frances from Toronto, Canada writes: Tossed Salada, the name you're referring to on the chiropodists' website is a male name.
  46. Rand Bowerman from United States writes: My experience in the States is that men generally get the shaft and that the custodial female usually trashes the Father in front of the children. 'KD' needs a psych eval and jail time for this and a complete loss of parental rights.
  47. paulo the seer from waterloo, Canada writes: Read the judges ruling (PDF) It's laughable. She has been prevented from seeing her kids, because she didn't comply with court orders. The first assessment said she had a 'notable disregard for authority'. Her husband said that she accused him of raping her while pregnant with their first child ..... then they went on and had another two kids ???? Expensive lawyers. You gotta love what they can do for you. Perks of being a surgeon, as opposed to a chiropadist.
  48. Doug Edwards from rural, Canada writes: You can win in the court system in Canada but only if you have almost unlimited money for lawyers. If you have limited financial resources, the system will suck you dry then throw you out to wait for the next sucker.
  49. SomeGuy From Hamilton from Hamilton, Canada writes: Boreal Moose from Canada writes: They do not make up the majority of Dad's. They do, however, make up the vast majority of deadbeat parents and spouse- beaters. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wow, misinformed much. Spousal abuse is near 50/50 in North America, with each sex contributing their fair share. As for deadbeats, non-custodial women are far more likely to not pay support then men. It is just there are far more non-custodial parents who are men, so the number is bound to be more in general. But per capital, there are more dead beat women then men. However, there is one caviet. Men are more likely to agree to no child support if it means getting the child(ren) and saves a battle.
  50. w b from Canada writes: Hello, I saw a comment remarking about no 'Mens Shelters'. Just for peoples knowledge Calgary has one (unless its closed now). I would like to point out that the city I live in could use one. The amount of Men I have met who have been chased - harrased - abused - scamed and left living in their car or where ever is astounding. The whole system is biased. Right from Childrens Aid, to Cops, to the courts. Plain and simple if you are a guy experiencing any sort of family issue you have no support, you will not get any support, and would be treated as though you are the problem and removed. I have learned this from experience and through talking to others. It is honestly a sad state. The children loose, the lawyers win. The others just cover their butts by siding with the mother just because...... Thank you.
  51. Dave AAAA from Canada writes: Maybe the broader message is that people need to be more responsible in making their decisions to have children in the first place. It appears both parties are at fault here. If you are not in a stable relationship, please do not have kids. It's should be about them not you.
  52. John McEnroe from Toronto, Canada writes: Tossed Salada. I thought you just believed in justice until your last mysoginist comment, referring to Afghanistan 'having it right'. We all know what you mean, and your bigoted comments are not welcome. Good to know your true stripes, that you just hate women.
  53. paulo the seer from waterloo, Canada writes: Look at the husband's submission: By 2005, he was only allowed to take them to school, short times on the weekend, and to take them on holidays (disgraceful!) But apparently she cancelled some of the holidays, and he lost deposits (awwww) Oh, and he refused to sign the documents to allow her to take the kids on holiday to St Lucia (meanie). And this is HIS version of events. Remember this is a CONTEMPT of COURT decision. She lost her kids because she didn't play nice with the judge. Surgeon = Good Lawyers = Justice for the right price.
  54. Steven Habeth from Colborne Ontario, Canada writes: MY .10 CENTS WORTH ! (price gone up due to inflation) .01 cent for GST..... Hmmmm....., maybe she might get jail time if she dosen't pay the fines. Kind of wish that the judges would read the G & M's comments section. A lot of people here see/know the problems that fathers have with custody and visitation of there kids. I wonder if the group called 'Fathers For Justice' are still around ?
  55. Capitalist to the core. from Manhattan, United States writes: For the information of Diane Schweik & others, a chiropodist is the British English form of the word podiatrist. Don't ask me why I know this. Anyhow, I gotta assume that she was pretty hot, b/c why would that fella keep coming back to that looney? Some women seem to think that just because they sat on the nest for nine months, they get all the voting rights. That's bull$hit.
  56. Lowen Wrainger from Canada writes: And do you think that this specific case that went 7 rounds will set a precedent and put non-custodial parents on an equal footing? Guess again because the system is all about making payments and then 'maybe' getting to 'see' your children at an appointed time slot. This guy had extra money to go the distance, while the majority of us are just trying to 'find' a job that pays rent/food.
  57. Dulce et Decorum Est Pro HARPER Mori? from David Thomson please buy back the Globe and restore quality!, writes: Jail time for recidivist Order breachers is the only sensible response. Put them in the Don for a night or few and see if they keep up their self-regarding contempt for society's laws.
  58. Canadian Father from Canada writes: Boreal Moose from Canada writes: Susan Cain from Brampton On, Canada writes: Men need to collectively form a strong movement that gets some press to show the other side of this sad affair. And please do post about the dead beat dad's they do not make up the majority.... _____________________ They do not make up the majority of Dad's. They do, however, make up the vast majority of deadbeat parents and spouse- beaters. I'm happy this fellow finally got to seen the light at the end of a dark tunnel, but lets not get carried away here. Ask the cop who terrorizes whom on a more regular basis? I aint never heard a no men's shelter! Sorry Boreal Moose before you leave a comment like this for everyone to see. Get educated. Go to Statscan and look up the statistics on spousal abuse reports. They are basically even. Of course the feminist misandrists of the world would try and make you think differently. I don't even want to start on the whole deadbeat dad comment I could spend all day on that one. Father's everywhere are being destroyed, emotionally, physically, financially everyday. It is a disgrace. This one gets an 'unusually harsh' punishment. Again what a joke. I bet this guy spent $300k to some justice. How many of us have that sitting in out bank accounts.
  59. Tossed Salada from Canada writes: Thanks for the info Margaret Frances. As I stated I didn't assume that they used her real initials either. I am sure however that the Association is aware of her and I still asked the question of them if she is going to go in front of a disciplinary committee.
  60. Jason Jason from Windsor, Canada writes: @ DaveAAA - Your comments need to be posted again and again and again...
  61. M M from Canada, Canada writes: Finally women are required to take responsibility for their actions (I'm a woman by the way before anyone bashes me as some Neanderthal male!). For too long women have demanded the ability to live their life's independently but demanding all the protection of society.
  62. Dave AAAA from Canada writes: Jason, I agree, but sadly I think it would still fall on deaf ears.
  63. Hunkered down in the land of never ending promises from Canada writes: The mother was fined by the court. The fine is not an award to the father but goes to the province just the same as the proceeds of a traffic ticket. paulo the seer: Seems the judge (female) believes the reverse is the truth. Are you a legal expert? If so please avail us of your vast and extensive knowledge and insight. How do you conclude that the father is a deadbeat. There wasn't any issue of support of the children. As it is the father is supporting his daughters as he now has custody of them. You seem to know more about this case than the rest of us to make such a judgement. Again please enlighten us with your vast knowledge of how the law should work. Please explain how ignoring court orders is not flaunting the justice system. The judge ruled that she was compliant when in court, agreeing to all variances etc. but then once outside the court, continued in her actions. Basically she was spitting in the court's face. That type of behaviour does not win you friends or favours. It is obvious that the mother has real issues with authority and she should have to undergo a psychiatric assessment to see if she requires professional help/therapy. But I'm just a layman and understand little of the intracacies of the legal system. Again please enlighten me/us with your vast knowledge.
  64. Boreal Moose from Canada writes: SomeGuy From Hamilton from Hamilton, Canada and Canadian Father: I'm not going to look up the stats, but what you both say seems plausible. Most women keep the kids. Lots more fathers don't, so lots more father's take off and fail to pay. But the almost miniscule (by comparison) number of women in that position are even worse. Fine. I believe you. But anyone who attempts, with a striaght face, to even BEGIN to hint that female-to-male, wife-to-husband, violence and spousal abuse and threatening behaviour and fright and flight and terror and seeking shelter from danger and brutality are anyway even remotely close to being even a hundred miles from the same ballpark is only a delusional fool, and quite possibly jaded and blinded by sad personal experience.
  65. chanel turner from Canada writes: Excellent! Perhaps this is the first step forwards force parents who are obviously self-centered and immature to put the best interests of the children ahead of themselves, ahead of child support, ahead of the parents own egos!
  66. tiffany poledancer from the beach, Thailand writes: A couple of points: 1. The word is 'lose'!!!! You can't loose out but you can loosen a knot. 2. A hot professional chick with a foot fetish might be worth the trouble. 3. They do have Men's shelters...we call them Mom's house. 4. Before anyone gets mad that I am taking this lightly...I have been through similar experience and ran out of money but life has to go on. I am just hoping in the future my son or nephew will never go through what men have to suffer today at the hands of family courts. 5. Cheer up guys, the pendulum has swung all the way and is coming back...not a victory but a distinct end to increasing defeats.
  67. Boyd King from Canada writes: John McEnroe from Toronto, Canada writes: Tossed Salada. I thought you just believed in justice until your last mysoginist comment, referring to Afghanistan 'having it right'. We all know what you mean, and your bigoted comments are not welcome. Good to know your true stripes, that you just hate women John, read the post again. Tossed salada didn't say that. Dan shoort did. she/he was commenting on his idiotic comment.
  68. Dave AAAA from Canada writes: Chanel Turner, please don't get your hopes up.
  69. John legge from Toronto, Canada writes: Justice McWatt is a rarity - a Family Court Judge with advanced education and experience in psychology as well as real experience as a lawyer. She actually knows about - and cares deeply about kids. If Court Orders are not followed by the rich and privileged, the Law has no hold. This is a wise - and brave decision, by a wise and good judge. It will be neat to see if any Appeal. Kirk Makin cannot really comment on whether or not there are any Judges upstairs with Justice McWatt's training, experience and insight. Which may explain some of the mess in the Family Courts.
  70. Proventus - from Ottawa, Canada writes: Jose Penalidade wrote positively: 'We don't know what king of man AL is.....' The kind that cares enough to go over at night, risking arrest for prowling or stalking, in order to say goodnight to his children.
  71. Canadian Father from Canada writes: Boreal Moose from Canada writes: SomeGuy From Hamilton from Hamilton, Canada and Canadian Father: But anyone who attempts, with a striaght face, to even BEGIN to hint that female-to-male, wife-to-husband, violence and spousal abuse and threatening behaviour and fright and flight and terror and seeking shelter from danger and brutality are anyway even remotely close to being even a hundred miles from the same ballpark is only a delusional fool, and quite possibly jaded and blinded by sad personal experience. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Boreal, once again you embarrass yourself. Men are stronger...I get that...so when a man hits a woman he can cause more damage (i.e. Rihanna...but did you notice who threw the first punch...while the man was driving no less) but Ophra doesn't mention that part. Lady do you know why there are no men's shelters? Because there is no government funding. Billions on dollars for women...not one penny for men, not one penny. How does the man who has 80%, 90% or 100% of his income imputed by some idiot judge supposed to live. He has no where to turn. Stop talking until you get educated.
  72. Proventus - from Ottawa, Canada writes: Boreal Moose from Canada writes: '...... only a delusional fool, and quite possibly jaded and blinded by sad personal experience. ' Yes. A beating by a spouse is always a sad personal experience.
  73. paulo the seer from waterloo, Canada writes: Hunkered Down - You can't be enlightened. You must enlighten yourself. Open your eyes. LOL
  74. Boreal Moose from Canada writes: Canadian Father from Canada, Waaah waah waah. Whine on harvest moon! Guys walk around wondering where the money went. Women walk around worried about the freaks who threaten that if they can't have her anymore, nobody's gonna. The guys who show up drunken & begging for sex 6 months after the break up, and destroy everything in sight til the cops arrive. The dude in TO who ignored the restraining orders so many times, but still managed to be free when he beat his ex to death with a baseball bat. Yeah man, and what about guys and the rape issue - something we all worry about happening to us all the time when we're outside of prison. Right. And cops can tell you about the epidemic of women breaking their husbands' noses on Saturday night drunkfests when the man who has sat at home all night with the kids confronts the woman about spending the last of the grocery money on beer & male strippers. Yeah yeah yeah. 2 % of women are pigs too. I get it.
  75. Canadian Father from Canada writes: Hey Boreal...I am done with you now...your ingnorance just jumps off the page and is not worth anymore of my time. You have to look beyond your personal (bad) experiences and understand what is really going on in the world. Read, educate yourself. The internet is a wonderful tool. Good luck to you.
  76. Canadian Father from Canada writes: Paulo...are you really that stupid? This woman abused her own children for years. All she gets is a measly $35,000 fine. I guarantee you she got at least 15 times that amount in child support. This guy had to spend at least $300k and 8 years of his life to save his children from this abuser. Wake up man!
  77. Boreal Moose from Canada writes: Canadian Father from Canada writes: Hey Boreal...I am done with you now...your ingnorance just jumps off the page and is not worth anymore of my time. You have to look beyond your personal (bad) experiences and understand what is really going on in the world. Read, educate yourself. The internet is a wonderful tool. Good luck to you. __________________________ Personal experience? 2 sons, 12 & 18 years. Happily married to their mom. Have lunch with all my ex's when they're in town. Play hockey, baseball and run marathons. I've known many women who've had to take action to protect their persons from jealous freak men. But in 45 years I've never played any sport with any guy (out of hundreds) who ever once talked about fearing for his safety because of the potential violence of a woman. Period. You do you argument no good at all by pretending the issue of violence and fear surrounding men and women is even remotely blanced or equal in the slightest. It is not. Goodbye and good luck.
  78. Boreal Moose from Canada writes: Squish_ap From BC from Canada writes: I would like to please remind people that this has very little to do with gender and everything to do with nasty people, of both genders. _______________________________ Amen. Hope your kids are alright after all that.
  79. Squish_a_p From BC from Canada writes: Boreal Moose from Canada, very true. I had to deal with a deadbeat dad and my children had to deal with parental alienation that he perpetrated. I was much to passive, trying to do the right thing by the kids. Even though he quit his job and took off to avoid court ordered child support, I never denied him access to the children in the way of phone calls and holidays. I tried to fight back, it took 6 years to have my Ontario court order changed to a BC court order to be enforced. By then, it was too late. I could never have afforded to go back to court to fight for what had already been court ordered. He too had absolutely no respect for the law or the court system. Worst of all, he had no respect for his children and their feelings. Narcissistic. I see alot of mother bashing going on here. I would like to please remind people that this has very little to do with gender and everything to do with nasty people, of both genders.
  80. Canadian Father from Canada writes: I've known many women who've had to take action to protect their persons from jealous freak men. But in 45 years I've never played any sport with any guy (out of hundreds) who ever once talked about fearing for his safety because of the potential violence of a woman. Period. You do you argument no good at all by pretending the issue of violence and fear surrounding men and women is even remotely blanced or equal in the slightest. It is not. Goodbye and good luck. Well Boreal...I just couldn't resist one more comment. I too have never "personally" experienced any male friends fearing violence from women. But that doesn't mean that violence against men does not exist on a equal basis as the true statistics show. The only studies that say anything different are from the government funded feminist agenda. Please get your head out of the sand. There, no I am done.
  81. Hugh Glen from Barrie, Canada writes: Boreal Moose from Canada writes: ____________________ Susan Cain writes: Men need to collectively form a strong movement that gets some press to show the other side of this sad affair. And please do post about the dead beat dad's they do not make up the majority.... ____________________ They do not make up the majority of Dad's. They do, however, make up the vast majority of deadbeat parents and spouse- beaters. Ask the cop who terrorizes whom on a more regular basis? Thanks for proving Susan's point: if you did a little of that research you glibly mentioned you'd find that deadbeats and spousal abusers are not overwhelmingly male despite the PR campaign that says so. Greed is not a male exclusive trait and men drastically under-report instances of abuse. While this story highlights the reversal of stereotypical roles, it ~seems~ to indicate the underlying problem that many have already mentioned: All too often better lawyers are the sole determinant.
  82. Ice Rider from Canada writes: I hope she was also lumbered with the dad's legal costs.
  83. Rick C from Calgary, Canada writes: Right on. Nice to see the judge put this biotch in her place. Too bad he didn't order her to pay an exorbitant amount so that she was financially crippled with no hope of retirement before 95.
  84. Rick C from Calgary, Canada writes: Boreal Moose from Canada writes: "But in 45 years I've never played any sport with any guy (out of hundreds) who ever once talked about fearing for his safety because of the potential violence of a woman." I have. Several in fact. To suggest there aren't women out there who physically abuse their husbands is just dumb. Does it happen as often as men physically abusing women? No but it happens. When it does most often women use weapons instead of just their fists. It is much more common for women to use emotional abuse on men than physical abuse though.
  85. Boreal Moose from Canada writes: Hugh Glen from Barrie, Canada and Rick C from Calgary: In case you have both lost your minds, I am not saying some men don't get whacked up side the head by women, or that no women are dangerous to men. I did not say that, although you appear to have read that. What I said was, men are overwhelmingly more dangerous than women, more aggressive than women, stronger than women and more violent than women. They also tend to be more agressive about their posessiveness towards spouses and girlfriends. The consequences of their acting on these impulses are to be found with a monotonous regularity in the bit pieces in the local news sections of newspapers - domestic calls police respond to. And I would confidently contend that when it comes to spousal murder, men completely dominate that field.
  86. Colleen McIntosh from Ottawa, Canada writes: Hello...it's about time that men receive a fair "shake" in custody matters. The Court System has long ruled in "favour" of the Mother and against the Father...without regard to the truth, facts or what is most beneficial to the children. Thankfully, this Case will set a precedent in which other Father's might yet receive a measure of justice, fairness and access to their children. Personally, don't believe in using my children as "pawns" to exact revenge on my ex-husband. Always, strive to maintain and reassure "our" children, they are loved and valued by both their Parents, no matter what happens between the two adults. Court Orders are not useful or helpful in negotiating a fair distribution of time with children, for the non-custodial parent. Basically, threw out "Orders" and reaffirmed that both the children and ex could have unlimited contact, visits, phone calls and outings...any time desired...unless some specific events, outings or plans were already in place. A great deal of flexibility, on my part, allowed a damaged relationship with their Father to blossom and heal, naturally...to the mutual benefit of ALL! Afterall...believe that children need both their parents to be all that they can be! In the end, they will always be "our" children, together...that's a fact that will never change.
  87. Andre Poirier from Canada writes: Boreal Moose says "What I said was, men are overwhelmingly more dangerous than women, more aggressive than women, stronger than women and more violent than women. They also tend to be more agressive about their posessiveness towards spouses and girlfriends. " While this may be true of the past, it is not inherently true of human nature. Promoting this type of mistruth is not in the interest of justice. I know that this type of thinking is promoted by many, however it needs to be deconstructed. Yes historically this may have been the case, but it is not a constant inherent trait of humanity, and you should be mindful of the generality that is said. Because if you believe it to be an inherent trait, you teach it to the next generation, and we stay in this quagmire paradigm forever. Power was in the hands of men in the 19th Century, gradually women obtained a number of rights. Today they have in many instances more power then men. Before an unbalanced situation balances it swings the other way. This ruling is an example of coming into balance. But there are many instances out there where women still get away with violating agreements court orders and then they get the very court order they were violating overturned. Statistics on the topic are not reliable or conclusive. One could also say, men are more tolerant, accepting of abuse than women, and therefore there are less reported incidences of abuse towards men. The whole point is we should not be alienating ourselves based on our gender, but we should be working together for justice for all. Boreal Moose, I would invite you to make comments that do not initiate unnecessary division and conflict.
  88. Darrin Duell from Canada writes: I think every guy has a friend that has been abused and/or taken advantage of by the mother of his children. The courts are clearly biased against men as are all government institutions.. glad to see that if you have the $$$ to spend and the patience of Job there is a glimmer of hope for Justice.
  89. Laura Dover from Calgary, Canada writes: They both sounded kind of weird.
  90. One Chance from Canada writes: She's a foot doctor, he's a vascular surgeon... And the Canadian taxpayer picks up the cost of the trials, in addition to absorbing this extended waste of time and judicial man/womanpower in an already overstretched system. And who paid for the "parental alienation centre in the United States for deprogramming"? I'd rather live in Canada than anywhere else I know of, but, man, sometimes our system is so screwed up I can hardly believe it. Why don't we turn the parents over to a Shari'a court and let them both be stoned to death for shocking stupidity in the management of their lives? It's obvious the children have already learned to live without either parent... Oh, wait, we desperately need both foot doctors and vascular surgeons. Damn. I guess $35 000 will have to do.
  91. Boreal Moose from Canada writes: Andre Poirier from Canada writes: Yes historically this may have been the case, but it is not a constant inherent trait of humanity, and you should be mindful of the generality that is said. Because if you believe it to be an inherent trait, you teach it to the next generation, and we stay in this quagmire paradigm forever. --------------------------------------------- I hope you are right about it being overly generalized. And I am very mindful of not teaching it to my sons. But I'm just not sure aggression and a greater propensity to violence and violent posessiveness is not a trait (or an interconnected series of traits) which evolutionary biology has bestowed on men in greater abundance than women. I think it has done just that. With all due respect to what Rudyard Kipling was getting at - the female is in fact NOT deadlier than the male.
  92. Andre Poirier from Canada writes: Boreal Moose, I believe we are equal in the sight of God (whether or not you are religious). Man and woman are one and the same. Males and Females are meant to not be deadly. Both can become deadly if improperly socialized, and taught. Violence and fear in general, has been historically a significant means of human organization, however this also is not an inherent human trait, this is an animal trait. As human beings realize their higher calling, i.e. become civilized, violence becomes something of the past and an obstacle to human advancement. If we believe these notions, that we are bad, violent, divided, we lose sight of our destiny which is to be spiritual, to realize that we are all one interdependant humanity. In any case I get some inspiration from www.transformingneighborhoods.org if you care to check it out. Thanks for your posting.
  93. Squish_a_p From BC from Canada writes: Boreal Moose from Canada, thank you. I hope they will be alright too but it's not looking good so far at 25 and 29. Thanks for your thoughtfulness.
  94. Mike Z from Canada writes: Canadian Father from Canada writes: Paulo...are you really that stupid? This woman abused her own children for years. All she gets is a measly $35,000 fine. I guarantee you she got at least 15 times that amount in child support. This guy had to spend at least $300k and 8 years of his life to save his children from this abuser. Wake up man! ----------------------- Canadian Father -- I agree. Not only does Paulo seem to be deliberately "spinning" the information provided, he seems to inexplicably assume that the mother, a chiropodist (which likely make a living similar to a surgeon) to be poor? I would guess Paulo to be either a troll or a man-hater. Anyone else should be able to see that, although we know little about the father other than his profession and that he has been very persistent, we know the mother to be immature, contemptible, and abusive to her children.
  95. Canadian Father from Canada writes: Boreal Moose from Canada writes: Hugh Glen from Barrie, Canada and Rick C from Calgary: What I said was, men are overwhelmingly more dangerous than women, more aggressive than women, stronger than women and more violent than women. They also tend to be more agressive about their posessiveness towards spouses and girlfriends. The consequences of their acting on these impulses are to be found with a monotonous regularity in the bit pieces in the local news sections of newspapers - domestic calls police respond to. And I would confidently contend that when it comes to spousal murder, men completely dominate that field. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Boreal...I keep trying to get away, but you keep calling me back with your ignorance. But this is for the rest of the readers, not you. Why not take a look at the statistics regarding women and how they are significantly more likely abuse and/or murder their own children than men are. Oh...but that is not dangerous. The majority of the calls by women to police are found to be false allegations. The internet...read and learn. I don't believe you can confidently contend anything that isn't written and/or funded by the feminist/government agenda..
  96. Sask Resident from Regina, Canada writes: Boreal Moose from Canada wrote: "They do, however, make up the vast majority of deadbeat parents and spouse- beaters." Since women are the vast majority of custodian parent, the number of deadbeat parents will be men. But a little story, where I live, a wife and mother was swinging a baseball bat at a guy, and hit him a couple of time, and when the police arrived they took the baseball bat from her and arrested him. The neighbours had to phone the media before he was released. Meanwhile, the wife drained the accounts and took the children back to Ontario. The police officer's off hand remark "women are never the abusers"! If a man claims physical (or worse, mental) abuse, the court will laugh at him and ask why he didn't just deal with it.
  97. home in Toronto from Toronto, Canada writes: What is wrong with these women? First, the one who murdered her baby last week to get back at the dad, now this? Do these women know how lucky they are? There are men out there who flat out do not want anything to do with the children. Yet, you have these women who are pushing men out of the children's lives. Something is definitely wrong here.
  98. Erick Johnson from Toronto, Canada writes: Just remember people, objective evidence is key to effective affidavits. Document important recordings, receipts, etc.... and the more law and statutes you find and copy the better client you are, and you save $/h on a solicitor...
  99. Erick Johnson from Toronto, Canada writes: btw... get a Queen's Printer copy whenever possible,it's official..... don't just print it off the net, you need proof of source...
  100. Sebastian Cobe from Calgary, Canada writes: Refreshing to see a ruling that highlights the severe problem of emotionaly abusing children. Which leaves scars that last longer then bruises. One of my best friends is pretty much unable to have a relationship with a women. After years of living with his mother putting down his father only too be able to really see his father as a human being when he became an adult. He doesn't trust any women and feels they always have mailicious motives or will be out to get him in the end. It's sad.
  101. paulo the seer from waterloo, Canada writes: I hope you have all read the Judges decison (it's in the National section - it's not accessible from Home). I think you might be shocked if you read it. The first court judgement happened in 2000, and she didn't fully comply with it. For 6 years, the husband did nothing about it. Although he did take the family TOGETHER on multiple holidays around the world. So you can basically ignore the period 2000 to 2006. He acquiesed to her flouting of the court order. In 2006 contact between the parents was severed, after an incident when he refused to allow the mother and children to go on vacation without him to St Lucia. Court ordered additional time with children. Children did not want to go visit the father. There is NO EVIDENCE of a consistent pattern of 'abuse' by the mother. Immature, poor parent maybe. But in this case, the punishment clearly does not fit the crime. She is now not allowed to go within 300m of the children. Boy, those kids are really going to HATE him now.
  102. paulo the seer from waterloo, Canada writes: This case smacks of poor legal representation, and a miscarriage of justice. I would be amazed if it isn't overturned on appeal. There seems to be clear errors of FACT and of LAW. Read the judges decision ...... and decide yourself.
  103. t t from Barrie, Canada writes: I don't know why men even bother getting married and having kids when the system is so heavily stacked against them. The sad thing is the young men who are reading this and know about the anti-male family courts will STILL go ahead and get married. How stupid can you get? THE WRITING'S ON THE WALL!! If you went into a shop looking for a parachute and the clerk tells you that half of them will fail, do you still go ahead and buy one? Plus, child support isn't even based on actual costs. You have cases where a very rich father will pay tens of thousands of dollars a month. What child on this planet needs that much a month to survive on? This system isn't sustainable. As far as western society is concerned, the chicken will come home to roost.
  104. You (Mike Murphy, from Sault Ste. Marie, ON, Canada) wrote: We have on this thread some discussion on the relative propensity for violence by both genders. In Canada and the USA it is pretty much equal. Women, because of size differences, make up by using weapons. When you have been attacked with a 4.5 foot rake handle or a 10lb jug of water bounces off your head you will then know a female can pack a lethal dose of aggression. Females also resort to far more subtle and less obvious emotional and financial abuse. For those who don't think women are killers you haven't read the news recently about the woman in Edmonton who punched, kicked, nocked down and punched again. Her partner died 5 days later. This one won't even show up as DV in Stats Can reports. Yesterday we saw the reports of the mom who may have killed her two children in Quebec. What you may not know is that in the USA and Australia moms are the fiercest predators of children. By a wide margin they kill and abuse children compared to dads. Lesbians have a 40% higher rate of DV than hetero couples. Those who feel so self righteous about female initiated violence as less problematic really don't know what is going on and are acting like gender feminist spin doctors. The dad in this case spent $350,000.00 on legal fees and expenses to try and maintain a relationship with his children. He is a rare man who has both the financial wherewithal and emotional resources to tackle a sociopathic, narcissistic mom. She will likely appeal the decision so it may not be over yet. $35,000.00 is a minuscule amount of payment for a decade of child and spousal abuse. PA is not only severe child abuse it is horrendous spousal abuse on the target. I have seen a slight wiggle in the pendulum which sets itself at the far left of its swing in favour of custody and support matters in Family Law (FLAW) toward moms. Advocacy by men and women who are living or observing inequities must grow and be heard. Moms and dads both alienate. It must stop for the sake of the children.
  105. You (Mike Murphy, from Sault Ste. Marie, ON, Canada) wrote: Colleen McIntosh from Ottawa, Canada writes: "Afterall...believe that children need both their parents to be all that they can be! In the end, they will always be "our" children, together...that's a fact that will never change." __________________________________________________________ Colleen you are gem full of common sense, dignity and most of all empathy for the needs of your children. Thank you for sharing your philosophy of parenting.
  106. Bob M from Canada writes: "Wow, only had to get to a 7th judge too. The Canadian legal system is a wonder to behold. Conrad Black loved it!
Posted by Michael J. Murphy at Friday, April 03, 2009 2 comments
Labels: , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)