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

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

Thursday, October 29, 2009

A Mangina Journalist makes sport of female on male violence ~ Go ballistic to protect the family jewels

My observations of Mr. Baron's misandry:
fromMike Murphy
sender timeSent at 13:44 (GMT-04:00). Current time there: 17:33.
toEBaron@png.canwest.com, wmoriarty@png.canwest.com, ERolfsen@png.canwest.com, KMercer@png.canwest.com
ccJeremy Swanson
date29 October 2009 13:44
subjectGo ballistic to protect the family jewels Liberals make it harder for men to defend themselves BY ETHAN BARON,
Ethon: Re: Go ballistic to protect the family jewels - Liberals make it harder for men to defend themselves
OCTOBER 29, 2009 7:23 AM
You are making light of a vicious assault on a man. Would you do the same had the gender's been reversed. Not likely I do believe. Your editors are far too feminized and sanitized for that. We have copious numbers of manginas working in journalism who are clearly unable to see the double standard they represent when publishing such - whats that word - oh yes - drivel. Next time you want to seem funny at the expense of another man look in the mirror and ask yourself - would I do this if it were about a female. It is a very simple test. You are no David Letterman whose squirrel jokes are in far better taste than yours and that's not reaching a high plateau. Just ask his feminist critics or Sarah Palin. I do like Dave, however. Mike Murphy Promote Bill C-422 Equal Shared Parenting

Liberals make it harder for men to defend themselves

For men living in Langley, or even just visiting, I offer the same advice I get from my neighbourhood squirrels: Watch your nuts.

It appears a woman randomly assaulted a man in Langley, by kicking him where it counts.

Anthony Clark says he was strolling along 200th Street when a young woman walked up and delivered a powerful blow to his groin with her foot.

The kick exploded his testicle, which had to be surgically removed, Clark says.

His description of the assailant -- young, slim, average height -- doesn't narrow the field enough to be very helpful.

"To say, 'Yeah, beware of all women walking down the street, that would be tough,'" says Langley RCMP Sgt. Don Davidson.

Because the victim didn't report any robbery, and random attacks by women against men are exceedingly rare, RCMP remain puzzled about a motive. The woman may be mentally ill, have an axe to grind against men, or there may be more to the story, Davidson suggests.

For men, I offer the following solution: Armour yourselves.

You have several choices, and one of them is on sale.

For $199.95 US, marked down from $249.95 until Saturday, Tamiami Armor is selling a Level IIIA "ballistic cup." This snazzy little number, made of high-tech ceramic like that used in military flak vests, is fitted into a companion jockstrap.

"It stops all handgun bullets," says a company spokesman, who inexplicably declined to be identified.

Given that we're talking about an attack in the Lower Mainland, where gang-war bullets could potentially fly anywhere at any time, this tactical device would serve a double purpose.

It would protect the family jewels from this female suspect as well as from gangsters' random slugs.

The problem is, you'd soon find your protected package snarled in red tape, as the provincial government is bringing in legislation to outlaw body armour for ordinary citizens -- except by special permit.

Banned will be any "garment or item designed, intended or adapted for the purpose of protecting the body from projectiles discharged from a firearm," the draft legislation says.

Fortunately, less-expensive protection is available, without a permit, at martial-arts equipment stores. At the low end, you can buy a $15 plastic cup with jockstrap, but considering the force of the blow received by Clark, these cups might not be up to the job.

"Being plastic, it's possible you could crack them," says Sam Logan, manager of Golden Arrow Martial Arts in Vancouver.

It makes more sense to spring for the $40 steel cup.

"It's a special order," Logan says.

Clark says RCMP told him constables had heard of three or four similar attacks in Langley.

Davidson says Langley Mounties are not aware of other such incidents.

"They're saying they never told him that kind of thing," Davidson says.

In the meantime, it may make sense to buy some protective gear.

When it comes to safeguarding the important things in life, it's better to err on the side of caution.

Just ask any squirrel.

Parental Alienation: A Mental Diagnosis?

One of my comments on this site.
PAS and the usual suspects

You can get a flavour at the negative energy that is invoked when this subject arises. Those who believe it is "junk science" start sliming the theory and then other people. I want readers to take note of the vehemence of these deniers of abuse and then ask your self some reasonable questions.

In the normal course of family relationships children can be abused. In many countries it is the single mom who leads in this category for both maltreatment and death. You should note that some of the most passionate critics of this malady are moms who lost custody. Their first counter-attack is to call the opposing parent an abuser. Some organize themselves around lawyers who make a lucrative living from referrals, and call themselves protective parents. Most of these do not have fathers with custody in them. They are dominated by moms who have lost custody. In the USA 84% of decisions give maternal custody so when a mom does lose custody any reasonable person has got to understand there are serious issues. In Canada it is even more pronounced with over 90% of physical custody given to moms.

In both countries PAS has passed the relevant scientific tests for evidence that being Frye and Mohan. That it has not been given an entry in the DSM is often brought up as an issue yet the APA recommends custody evaluators use Dr. Gardner's books on PAS as part of the tool kit for their work. We should, however, not get hung up on semantics. Anyone with any contact or knowledge of children can recognize alienation of a child from a parent. Anyone with any kind of practical training can determine the cause. Common sense tells and close observation shows most children feel a sense of guilt if they are being abused by a parent thinking they have done something wrong. They usually don't hate the parent with the intensity an alienated child does. Abused children will try and please the abuser in order to get back in their good graces. They do not say to them without fear or reservation, "you smell, you hate mommy or daddy, you have bad breath, you have germs, you are over/underweight, you dress poorly, you are old, ugly, not liked by anyone and this list goes on. They will say this to your face on access visits in the hope you will take them back to the custodial parent.

In Canada the legal literature shows about a 2-1 ratio in terms of decided court cases where mom was the alienator. It is not strictly a one gender issue. Parental Alienation is real and is emotional abuse of children. Anyone who denies this is a person enabling this abuse.MJM

Thursday, October 29, 2009
  • Video
  • Comments (111)
  • Some experts say the extreme hatred some kids feel toward a parent in a divorce is a mental illness

    Posted October 29, 2009

    From an early age, Anne was taught by her mother to fear her father. Behind his back, her mom warned that he was an unpredictable and dangerous; any time he'd invite her to do anything—a walk in the woods, a trip to the art store—she would craft an excuse not to go. "I was under the impression that he was crazy, that at any moment he could just pop and do something violent to hurt me," says Anne, who prefers that only her middle name be used to guard her family's privacy. Typical of a phenomenon some mental-health experts now label "parental alienation," her view of him became so negative, she says, that her mother persuaded her to lie during a custody hearing when the couple divorced. Then 14, she told the judge that her dad was physically abusive. Was he? "No," she says. "But I was convinced that he would [be]." After her mother won custody, Anne all but severed contact with her father for years.

    Click here to find out more!
    Video: Children's Health Quick Tips
    Video: Children's Health Quick Tips

    If a growing faction of the mental-health community has its way, Anne's experience will one day soon be an actual diagnosis. The concept of parental alienation, which is highly controversial, is being described as one in which children strongly attach to one parent and reject the other in the false belief that he or she is bad or dangerous. "It's heartbreaking," says William Bernet, a child and adolescent psychiatrist and professor at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, "to have your 10-year-old suddenly, in a matter of weeks, go from loving you and hiking with you...to saying you're a horrible, ugly person." These aren't kids who simply prefer one parent over the other, he says. That's normal. These kids doggedly resist contact with a parent, sometimes permanently, out of an irrational hate or fear.

    Bernet is leading an effort to add "parental alienation" to the next edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the American Psychiatric Association's "bible" of diagnoses, scheduled for 2012. He and some 50 contributing authors from 10 countries will make their case in the American Journal of Family Therapy early next year. Inclusion, says Bernet, would spur insurance coverage, stimulate more systematic research, lend credence to a charge of parental alienation in court, and raise the odds that children would get timely treatment.

    But many experts balk at labeling the phenomenon an official disorder. "I really get concerned about spreading the definition of mental illness too wide," says Elissa Benedek, a child and adolescent psychiatrist in Ann Arbor, Mich., and a past president of the APA. There's no question in her mind that kids become alienated from a loving parent in many divorces with little or no justification, and she's seen plenty of kids kick and scream all the way to the car when visitation is enforced. But, she says, "this is not a mentally ill child."

    The phenomenon has been described for many decades, but it became a cause célèbre in 1985, when Richard Gardner, a clinical professor of psychiatry at Columbia University, coined the term "parental alienation syndrome." As more dads fought fiercely for joint custody, he observed a surge in the number of children suffering from a distinct cluster of symptoms, including a "campaign of denigration" against one parent that sometimes included a false sex-abuse accusation and automatic parroting of the other parent's views.

    But sound research supporting a medical label is scant, critics say. The American Psychological Association has issued a statement that "there is no evidence within the psychological literature of a diagnosable parental alienation syndrome." What's more, concern has grown that "PAS" could be invoked by an abusive parent to gain rights to a child who has good reason to refuse contact, says Janet Johnston, a clinical sociologist and justice studies professor at San Jose State University who has studied parental alienation. In teens, she notes, parental rejection might be a developmentally normal response. Anecdotal reports have surfaced that some kids labeled as "alienated" have become suicidal when courts have ordered a change of custody to the "hated" parent, she says.

    In any case, divorcing parents should be aware that hostilities may seriously harm the kids. Sometimes manipulation is blatant, as with parents who conceal phone calls, gifts, or letters, then use the "lack of contact" as proof that the other parent doesn't love the child. Sometimes the influence is more subtle ("I'm sure nothing bad will happen to you at Mommy's house") or even unintentional ("I've put a cellphone in your suitcase. Call when everyone's asleep to tell me you're OK"). It's important to shield kids from harmful communication, says Richard Warshak, a clinical professor of psychology at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center and author of Divorce Poison. If something potentially upsetting about an ex must be conveyed, he advises imagining how you would have handled the conversation while happily married; how would you have explained Mom's depression, say?

    "The long-term implications [of alienation] are pretty severe," says Amy Baker, director of research at the Vincent J. Fontana Center for Child Protection in New York and a contributing author of Bernet's proposal. In a study culminating in a 2007 book, Adult Children of Parental Alienation Syndrome, she interviewed 40 "survivors" and found that many were depressed, guilt ridden, and filled with self-loathing. Kids develop identity through relationships with both their parents, she says. When they are told one is no good, they believe, "I'm half no good."

    Now 23, divorced, and a parent herself, Anne has recognized only recently that she was manipulated, that her long-held view of her father isn't accurate. They live 2,000 miles apart but now try to speak daily. "I've missed out on a great friendship with my dad," she says. "It hurts."

    National Post editorial board: All-day kindergarten doesn't make sense

    Out of curiosity I did a little number crunching on current teacher demographics in Ontario by age category related to the following editorial in the National Post today just to see what the trend line looks like in our schools and indeed in the broader public service. Currently both the Provincial and Federal Public Service has a 55% female 45% male composition. Some of you will say there is Murphy on another one of his Feminist rants or if you are a mangina you might even call me intolerant names just like the feminists currently proffer periodically. Personally I could care less but I do have a need to elucidate (not hallucinate) on matters of males being discounted and females given greater value in almost all aspects of our daily discourse. My target, however, is not women it is feminists and politicians just in case someone was going to do the usual and call me a misogynist. I love women especially those like Sass and Kat26 who stand up and assert their equality. My crunching covers the current age groups by gender as follows and their dominance. Total teachers registered in the Province 219,181 - more to come courtesy of McQuinty. Total Female = 149,636 Male = 59,968 Ratio is not quite 3-1 female to male at 265.50% >female It gets more interesting when you break them out by age cohort. Watch the trending from young to older Age 20-30 female 32,421 male 8,012 Female lead by 404.66% Age 31-40 f - 47,069 m -17,303 Female lead by 272.03% Age 41-50 f - 36,016 m -15,134 Female lead by 237.98% Age 51-60 f - 33,707 m -14,116 Female lead by 238.79% Age 61+ f -10,000 m - 5,403 Female lead by 185.08% Trending is obvious in that we have far fewer male teachers and accelerating under the McQuinty lefty Liberals. Why are males not interested in teaching? What impediments are in play through the schooling of boys that causes them to turn away from teaching as men? Here is possibly one reason and is a true story - " A couple of weeks ago an older girl bullied a 9 year old boy and roughed him up some. He did what we told him was right and he reported the incident to the female principal and female teacher. He was told not to be a sissy, nothing was done. A few days later he and a male friend were playing a bit rough and all hell broke lose. They were doing nothing wrong just being boys. They are still close friends but don't really understand why they were disciplined and the other incident was ignored. Try and explain to a 9 year old that this is the way it is. How does one explain the statement made, I can do this because I am a girl. What is this teaching young males." This is not isolated and goes on every day all across this country but in many and various ways. I haven't yet found the demographics for our other largest tax cost industry of health care but I will source them someday. I will posit I will find a largely female dominated Industry as well with trends of greater domination coming particularly in the higher ranks of Doctors. Wake up men - you are being feminized and marginalized in many ways and you do not even see it.

    National Post editorial board: All-day kindergarten doesn't make sense
    Posted: October 29, 2009, 2:00 PM by NP Editor

    Given Ontario's massive deficit, why is Premier Dalton McGuinty focused on imposing an expensive, full-day kindergarten program on the province?

    Cynics will say that the project is about burnishing his legacy, about leaving future generations of Ontarians something more than red ink. He's practically said as much, suggesting that once his kindergarten program was passed, "I find it hard to see somebody seeking to undo [it]."

    He is, of course, right: It is much harder to take away expensive entitlements than it is to introduce them in the first place. This is one of the reasons that the nanny state-- of which Mr. McGuinty might be considered governess-in-chief, these days -- is anxious to get into the business of hiring literal all-day nannies for Ontario's five-year-olds.

    The Canadian Christian Heritage Party declares open season on men

    The following is the CHP's rationalization for their declaration of open season on males in Canada. 

     Tue, 27 Oct 2009 Dear Thank you for your question regarding our platform statement: The CHP will maintain the registration of handguns but would restore the right of Canadians, especially women, to own .32 and .25 calibre weapons of barrel lengths shorter than 4.1 inches. Small handguns in the hands of women would do much to end the fear they currently experience because of violent ex-partners. 

    The intent of "especially women" was not to suggest that domestic violence is primarily perpetrated by men against women. As you correctly point out, statistics show that men and women are about equal in abuse. However, they also show that more serious injury and death are generally men assaulting women. I've quoted below from a Macleans article from July 2006 entitled "Breakup Blast". Domestic violence goes across all relationships. But serious injury and death -- it's men stalking and killing women," says Peter Jaffe, a professor at the University of Western Ontario and academic director of the Centre for Research on Violence Against Women and Children in London. 

    The smaller calibre guns are lighter weight and easier for women to carry in a purse. That was the point behind specifying women. I hope this clears up that our intent was not to fear monger or bash men, rather it was to assure that women would also be able to defend themselves by having the ability to carry a light weapon. Vicki Gunn Executive Director CHP Canada This is my response to their policy.

    What they don't get is that 999,993 men out of every million male voters to not kill their spouses and the vast majority of Canadians do not get affected by DV. In families where it does occur it is pretty much equal and the women very likely initiates more than the man. Why you ask? Simply because she knows she can because the vast majority of men are socialized to not retaliate. 

     Mike Murphy Wednesday, October 28, 2009 9:24 PM To: electjim@rogers.com Cc: Jeremy Swanson

    Subject: Election pandering to women, to own .32 and .25 calibre weapons It was brought to my attention you are pandering to the feminist minority to enable all women, at the exclusion of men, to carry handguns with the sole purpose of killing men perceived by the woman to be a predator. It sounds like a licence for open season on males.

    I have been advised you are aware Intimate Partner Violence In Canada is about equal. The most recent figures from a 2004 Social Survey by Statistics Canada "Family Violence in Canada: A statistical profile, 2005" shows an estimated 7% of women and 6% of men representing 653,000 women and 546,000 men in a current or previous spousal relationship encountered spousal violence during the five years up to and including 2004. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/Daily/English/050714/d050714a.htm 

    Men are seriously injured in about 1/3 of these cases. You must, therefore, make note of this and provide for these men as well other wise it is blatant sexism you are promoting. In a country that has roughly 16.1 million females you are going to promote all of the adults of that gender who would like to, can carry hidden handguns because a tiny minority suffer physical abuse. The 653,000 who reported abuse of all kinds, is 7% of the then population and that is - I repeat - all forms of abuse.

     Physical abuse causing injury is a tiny proportion of even the 7%. In terms of spousal homicides in relation to the population of the country it is minuscule. On the basis of per million couples this is how it works out. 999,997 women do not kill their male spouses and 999,993 men do not kill their female spouses. I think we will see the male deaths increase under your proposal and in an effort to protect themselves we may see more illegal handguns in the possession of men. Contrary to Jaffe's narrow perspective women are more likely than men to stalk, attack and psychologically abuse their partners, according to a University of Florida study that finds college women have a new view of the dating scene. In a separate survey of 1,490 UF students, one quarter (25 percent) said they had been stalked during the past year and 7 percent reported engaging in stalking, of whom a majority (58 percent) were female. 

     Here are a few more studies you might want to consult. Virtually all empirical survey data shows women initiate domestic violence at least as often as men in heterosexual relationships and that men suffer one-third of physical injuries from domestic violence. Over 200 of these studies (and growing), using various methodologies, are summarized by Professor Martin Fiebert at http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

    Harvard Medical School and the American Psychiatric Association both recently announced a major national study in the U.S. that found half of heterosexual domestic violence is reciprocal and that: "Regarding perpetration of violence, more women than men (25 percent versus 11 percent) were responsible. In fact, 71 percent of the instigators in nonreciprocal partner violence were women." 

    http://psychnews.psychiatryonline.org/newsarticle.aspx?articleid=111137     The study also found: "As for physical injury due to intimate partner violence, it was more likely to occur when the violence was reciprocal than nonreciprocal. And while injury was more likely when violence was perpetrated by men, in relationships with reciprocal violence it was the men who were injured more often (25 percent of the time) than were women (20 percent of the time)." 

     A recent 32-nation study by the University of New Hampshire found women are as violent and as controlling as men in dating relationships worldwide. http://www.unh.edu/news/cj_nr/2006/may/em_060519male.cfm?type=n You quote Professor Jaffe and he is one of the feminist researchers who is famous for using very one sided data in his studies. He usually uses and reports only on subjects from transition shelters but never reports on how violent the women in the shelters have been toward their male partners. You will see from the above research you will be definitely putting a premium on females and putting a discount on being male. 

     Did you know lesbian partners have a higher DV rate than heterosexual partners? Under your agenda both of them can have hand guns. I will be advising male colleagues across Canada about your intentions and will ask all men to work diligently against your anti-male and ultimately anti-family agenda unless you reconsider it. It is a highly divisive and polarizing proposal. 

    Mike Murphy Sault Ste. Marie ON P6A 6J8 Promote Bill C-422 Equal Shared Parenting