Ending the feudal family law system is the aim of C-560 in Canada


Scott Brison,

We urge you to vote for family equality on May 27th. Vote for Bill C-560.

Live Free,
Connie Brauer
1061 Mines Rd. RR2
Falmouth, NS B0P 1L0
Phone, 902 791 0958
Email, cbrauer@eastlink.ca

From: ‘Glenn at Cheriton.ca’ glenn@cheriton.ca [CEPC_Members]

Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 6:43 PM

To: CEPC_Members@yahoogroups.com

Cc: EPOC_NEWS@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [CEPC_Members] Contact your MP before May 27th to end the feudal family law system and vote for Bill C-560

Ending the feudal family law system is the aim of C-560

The foundation of British law is the “Magna Carta” which for the first time, effectively restrained the judgment or discretion of the king.

Parents across Canada have organized to reform family law with latest efforts resulting in a bill in Parliament, C560, expected to get a second reading in May, 2014.

In April, 2013, Supreme Court Judge Thomas Cromwell released a report, commissioned by the Chief Justice, which called for a complete overhaul of family courts, bemoaned the failure of 30 years of “reforms” controlled by the legal profession, and slammed family law for inaccessibility, dismal outcomes and creating disrespect for the legal system. The report called for “consensual decisions” by parents.

Bill C560 aims to implement selected best practices from other jurisdictions to encourage parents to make such “consensual decisions”, to reduce conflict and costly legal battles, and also to ensure that both parents have the option of equal time with their children unless proven unfit.

These reforms are long overdue: A joint Senate-Commons report accepted by Parliament recommended shared parenting and equality of parents in 48 reforms in 1998. Every single recommendation was blocked by legal profession vested interests, who make billions of dollars from the current adversarial system.

When legal profession advocate Nicholas Bala says the system needs more “resources” – he means more money. Thus the choice is clear: either taxpayers pour further dollars into the current dysfunctional system, or we implement a selection of practices which have reduced costs to parents and children in other jurisdictions. Those practices make up Bill C560.       

Advocates of the current sole custody system don’t seem to be able to avoid making two claims: that more money to the existing “stakeholders” will fix the system and promoting unfounded prejudicial stereotypes against fathers. The Supreme Court report dismissed the first claim, so let’s examine one of the unfounded stereotypes:

Claims that large number of abusive fathers are gaining custody are belied by research which consistently shows that children are safer with fathers than with sole maternal custody. Social science also shows that joint custody or equal parenting reduces both conflict and abuse outcomes.

It is time to move beyond simplistic gender stereotypes and do what social science overwhelmingly shows is in children’s best interest: keep both parents unless clear proof of unfitness.

To argue over which is more disadvantaged, the “winners” or the “losers” of child custody cases is pointless: let us agree that a child who goes into family courts with two fit parents and ends up with only one is the real loser. Let us agree that legal and other adversarial professionals who exploit that process to line their pockets are the winners, pious claims to the contrary notwithstanding.

Bill C560 is a good initiative to reduce legal incentives to remove a fit parent without substantial evidence. In his book, “Equal Parenting Presumption”, custody expert Edward Kruk shows that at least 40% time sharing (preferably 50%) is the key to making real reforms work and improving outcomes for children and parents. Equal time as the starting point means both parents need not fear arbitrary loss of their kids and in practice most often work out their own parenting plan (which need not be 50/50).

A key point of Bill C560 is to define “best interests of the child” as keeping both parents unless one is proven unfit.

The last reforms parents successfully pushed for (1986) included the “friendly parent rule” which was supposed to presume joint custody by giving preference to the parent who would most encourage parenting by the other parent. Judges generally “read out” this provision of the Divorce Act, inserting the presumption that existence of conflict meant they could exercise judicial discretion and order sole custody. Worse, judges often presume that removing the parent seeking joint custody or equal parenting will stop conflict. It is a feudal system when the decision maker has complete discretion/decision rights without any responsibility for the outcomes. Social science research shows that sole custody generates conflict and disadvantages children, yet judges claim this is in “best interests of the child.” Nothing could be further from the truth.

Parents say that outcomes from the adversarial system have not perceptibly changed over the last several decades. Vested interests oppose changes since they make money from adversarial divorce and sole custody.

Bill C-560 brings long overdue non-adversarial reforms to a broken system. It should be supported by all members of Parliament as such reforms are supported by over 80% of the Canadian public.

Parents and supporters of these reforms should can call their federal MP and ask he or she to vote in favour of C-560. You can call in to radio or contact other media and make the point that your MP ran on the shared parenting policy in the last election and that your vote in the next election depends on how they vote May 27th for second reading.

Glenn Cheriton, President, Canadian Equal Parenting Council

p.s.  Here are some links to help you support equal parenting reforms:

http://canadianepc.org/donate

http://canadianepc.org/membership/advocate-signup/

__._,_.___


Posted by: “Glenn at Cheriton.ca” <Glenn@Cheriton.ca>


Why are the Fathers not honoured on Remembrance Day?


Thank you for your submission..

Thank you for your submission.

Below is what you submitted to info@legion.ca on Thursday, November 10, 2011 at 13:02:29


Topic: Where is the respect for the Fathers?

Name: Connie Brauer

Address: 1061 Mines Rd. RR2

City: Falmouth

Province: NS

Postal: B0P 1L0

Phone: 902.798.5267

Question or Comment:

Dear Legion,

Tomorrow is Remembrance Day. I may not go. I was dismayed at the response to a fellow activist for father’s rights, that was given to him regarding the wreath laid from the Mother’s of Canada. Where is the wreath From the Fathers of Canada?

Did they not lose their sons too? When will discrimination against men stop? You are discriminating against the very men who fought in the wars!

He wrote: For the last 14 years, I have been laying a wreath from “Fathers of Canada” on Remembrance Day at the National War Memorial, and asking the government and Legion to change the ceremony to recognize that soldiers have two parents. In the national ceremony, the Governor General lays a wreath from the people of Canada, then the “Mothers of Canada” wreath, then a wreath recognizing veterans. Our fathers’ wreath is kept back in the 8th wave, at the very end. Readers are right that the Memorial Cross and the “Silver Cross Mother” recognition are separate questions. In response to my letters, the Legion wrote that they would only consider including a father in the official party if there were no more mothers. In another letter, the Legion said that including mothers and excluding fathers was “sacrosanct”. It is unfortunate that this important day has become so politicized. The proper order should be people of Canada, veterans wreath and then “parents of Canada” or a wreath from a mother and a father. It does no honour to veterans, Canada, mothers or the Legion to exclude fathers.

Connie…

I looked up sacrosanct. Here’s what it said: Sacrosanctity was a right of tribunes in Ancient Rome not to be harmed physically. Plebeians took an oath to regard anyone who laid hands on a tribune as an outlaw liable to be killed without penalty. The term comes from the phrase sacer esto (“let him be accursed”) and reflects that violation of a tribune’s sacrosanctity was not only a secular offense, but a religious offense as well.[1]

Pretty barbaric, wouldn’t you say? Please look into this matter immediately and honour our fathers too, immediately!

Connie Brauer

Victim of judicial abuse against fathers and families by the courts.




 

Legal Leaks encourages victims of judicial abuse to post their court orders to expose the abuse to the world


LegalLeaks encourages victims of judicial abuse to post their court orders. « LegalLeaks

 

LegalLeaks encourages victims of judicial abuse to post their court orders.

You have heard of WikiLeaks.  Well this is LegalLeaks!

Here all victims of judicial abuse and human rights violations,  especially in the

family law area, can post their legal court orders to show

the world just how unjust our judicial system is.

This shows you how the legislation in our government is violating all

  • Parental Rights
  • Family Rights
  • Human Rights
  • Equal Rights
  • Protection by the Criminal Code
  • GUARANTEED  Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
  • United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights
  • Anti Slavery Rights.

They thrive unchallenged because they have four  things going for them.

  1. Secrecy. Do you realize that most family law court orders are not made public?
  2. Secrecy in Criminal Court. The judge does not provide a court order or a reason for the judge’s decision.
  3. Unlimited money. They have the money to outlast anyone and they get paid for doing it.
  4. Unlimited Power. No accountability by anyone including the government.

To post your court order, you must become a user.  Simply send me an email and ask to be added

and upon approval you will have access to only your posts. We encourage all members to make

a donation. We want to  promote this website to the world and we need your help. Send an email to familyjustice@eastlink.ca

and ask to become a user. I will set it up.


Make sure you

  1. click on your category.
  2. Country,
  3. province or state and
  4. the type of court order it is.
  5. Make sure to tag the person who violated your rights in the tag area. Add more keywords.
  6. Write a brief description in your post of the rights violated.
  7. Pdf files will show up in another window.
  8. If you have trouble submitting your files, see tutorial here.

Enjoy. There is no anonymity here.  Court orders contain the names of those involved.

Connie Brauer and Vic Harris

Falmouth, NS

Canada

Dec. 10 is Human Rights Day But No Human Rights In Canada!


Canadian Family Court

Dec.10th  is Human Rights Day.
We have the GUARANTEED Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and we have signed on with the
United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, since 1948, but there are no protections for individuals who are
being tortured by the government of Canada. Millions of Canadians are being deprived of their fundamental human rights
but have no access to resolution,  restitution or litigation. Slavery was abolished in 1830 and yet we are still slaves.
We are one such family. Why are we still paying child support to the mother for a missing 23 year old able bodied, mentally fit man?
It has now been nearly five years that he has been missing. No one will tell us where he is and yet we are FORCED to continue to pay
child support which should have been terminated four years ago.
What kind of a country is this that allows no resolution and continues to torture and persecute parents for being parents?
Our laws are biased, corrupt, cruel, discriminatory and abusive.
No one takes responsibility. Canadian Human Rights Counsel is labour law, only.
The Charter is routinely dismissed in the courts.
The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights is systematically ignored.
Our MP Scott Brison has done nothing to stop this torture or bring it up in the House of Commons.
We are not allowed to go to court as there is a $10,000 surety cost ordered to keep us out of court.
The only way to terminate child support is to go to court and apply. We can’t go to court and apply. This is a  direct violation of Sect. 24 of the Charter.
But who cares, the Charter isn’t upheld anyway.
The Dept. of Justice works for the government and not the people of Canada. It says so right on their website.
So, I ask you, what  third world country  is this? O Canada!

Connie Brauer

To Donate to the cause, see next tab at top.

THE NEW CANADIAN MUSEUM FOR HUMAN RIGHTS, MEETING IN HALIFAX


On Sept. 23, 2009 Victor Harris and I,  attended the round table discussions for the new Canadian Museum of Human Rights at the Maritime Museum of the Atlantic.

We met in the small craft room. Sail boats all over the place. Wonderful atmosphere.

We were seated at round tables with other guests and a facilitator and note taker.  Our facilitator was the best, Mary Beth. Our note taker was Vander.

We were all welcomed and treated with respect by the organizers.  They wanted our input  for the new museum. Their mandate is to treat people with sensitivity and respect and collect their stories.

As we told our stories at our individual tables and listened to each other’s stories, I realized there was an awful lot of pain and frustration  in this room. These were all brave people who came together with their stories and their concerns to share and contribute to the new museum.  This was a room full of Human Rights Violations.

It was a historical evening. I felt we had all created a little piece of history that night.

Watch for it. You will be impressed.

For more information about the museum, click here.

Connie Brauer

Canada’s human rights museum crosses country in search of stories


Parents!
Here’s a story in today’s Chronicle Herald. I have signed up to be there and tell our story.
Who else will go? All of us should show up.
Canada’s human rights museum crosses country in search of stories

By MICHAEL LIGHTSTONE Staff Reporter
Fri. Sep 4 – 4:46 AM


Irvine Carvery, president of the Africville Genealogy Society, plans to make a submission to officials from the Canadian Museum for Human Rights during public discussions Sept. 23 in Halifax. (Peter Parsons / Staff)


Irvine Carvery, president of the Africville Genealogy Society, plans to make a submission to officials from the Canadian Museum for Human Rights during public discussions Sept. 23 in Halifax. (Peter Parsons / Staff)

Residential schools forced on native children. Japanese families sent to Second World War-era internment camps. Black citizens resisting racism in their struggle for civil rights.

Gay bashing. Anti-Muslim activity.

The Holocaust.

Survivors of the aforementioned human rights abuses are among the many people in this country who have been victimized by state-sanctioned big-otry or the hateful intolerance of individuals.

This month, Nova Scotians will get their chance to say how they think such societal stains — and others — should be handled by a new national museum being built in Winnipeg.

Officials from the Canadian Museum for Human Rights will be holding a public roundtable Sept. 23 in Halifax and local folks are welcome to participate.

The session aims to collect “human rights stories, perspectives and ideas that can be used to develop the content of the museum,” a website said.

To register for the roundtable, call 1-877-295-6639 or register online at www.humanrightsmuseum.ca/share-your-story.

In Halifax, a submission from the Atlantic Jewish Council will be part of the consultation process, a spokesman said Thursday. The council is affiliated with the Canadian Jewish Congress, which has urged its member agencies to address the content committee when it visits various communities across Canada.

The consultation process began in May and is resuming now after a summer break.

The Canadian Jewish Congress “will be submitting a brief to the museum on the need for a prominent and dedicated Holocaust section in the new museum,” said an email message sent to the Atlantic Jewish Council.

Jon Goldberg, the council’s executive director, told The Chronicle Herald he intends to take part in what has been described as a two-pronged process. He said he’ll attend the public roundtable and a more private “bilateral” discussion with museum officials. Mr. Goldberg said it’s too early to say what exactly his submission will be about, but he acknowledged it’ll promote the historical significance and impact of the Holocaust.

Six million Jews and other Holocaust victims, such as Gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally disabled and political enemies, died during Hitler’s reign, when the Nazis ruled Germany. The start of the war was 70 years ago this month.

A museum spokeswoman said construction began in April and the building is to open in 2012. She said aside from exhibits showcasing the Canadian perspective, there will be international human rights stories “seen through a Canadian lens.”

see the rest of the story at

( mlightstone@herald.ca)

Connie Brauer