Category Archives: Commentary

Ex-member of Parliament calls for shared-parenting legislation in Canada

Good news for men who want to marry in Ontario.

Excerpt:

One man I spoke to, for instance, says his ex-wife falsely accused him of slamming a van door on her leg. And even though that assault charge was later withdrawn by the Crown attorney, the man says the allegations damaged his reputation during proceedings with a family court judge who restricted his access to his kids.

It’s those kinds of situations that the fledgling London Equal Parenting Committee will explore during “an evening of awareness in relation to domestic violence” Thursday at Crouch Library.

The evening’s main speaker is Roger Gallaway, the former Sarnia-Lambton MP who co-chaired a 1998 federal report called For The Sake Of The Children, which examined issues surrounding child custody.

“What I find distressing is the lack of objectivity around this whole subject,” says Gallaway, who represented his riding for the Liberal party from 1993 to 2006. “There has to be some type of balance put into the discussion. And it’s sadly lacking.”

Gallaway regrets that none of the 1998 report’s recommendations — including a call for stricter rules regarding the reporting of abuse — were ever adopted.

“An allegation of violence is a weapon,” he says. “And in Ontario we have a zero-tolerance policy, which generally speaking says that when allegations are made, it’s the male who’s removed (from the residence). And that then casts the die for what will occur in terms of child custody or access.”

Gallaway adds that more and more people are starting to realize that more and more deserving fathers are being shortchanged when it comes to contentious custody battles.

“There’s a growing constituency . . . that sees what’s occurring and knows these men aren’t bad people,” he says. “So the doubt about what is being said about (so-called) violent men is growing.”

What I’ve heard is that Ontario has the most unfair family court system in Canada, so this is welcome news. The more that courts discriminate against men and paint a portrait of men as unreliable and abusive, the less men will marry and stick around to be fathers. Men rise to the occasion in order to gain respect. No man wants to get involved with marriage and parenting when he is not going to be respected and valued by his wife and by society as a whole.

Men’s Rights activist Glenn Sacks comments on the article’s counterpoint against shared-parenting:

As a counterpoint, the article quotes DV advocate Peter Jaffe as saying that false accusations of DV are “rare.”  Actually, in the U.S. studies have shown that as much as 71% of DV restraining orders were either unnecessary or received under false pretenses.  Other studies show that over half involve not even the allegation of physical violence.  In Canada, reports of child maltreatment are deemed to be unsubstantiated or without evidence in 55% of cases according to the Canadian Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse and Neglect.  So what Jaffe said looks to be far from the truth.

Shared-parenting is one of the measures that Dr. J said would encourage people to get married and stay married, which benefits the children. Biological fathers are not really a threat to children – it’s the stepfathers and live-in boyfriends who pose a threat to children.

Related posts

Is Toyota the victim of persecution by the mainstream media?

From National Review. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

For those who’ve been setting up the Japanese automaker as the latest symbol of heartless capitalism, it’s been a bewildering few days. On Wednesday the media jumped hard for the story of a man who frantically called 911 while his Prius ran away on a San Diego freeway (outstandingly gullible CBS News coverage here). Before long observers had begun poking holes in the story, and colorful details on the man’s earlier doings have been emerging all weekend. On Thursday, meanwhile, the New York Times — whose news columns had helped set the tone for the panic with accusatory coverage — ran what was actually a surprisingly good op-ed advancing the possibility that most of the Toyota cases will turn out to be the result of . . . driver error.

[…]With Audis, and in other acceleration scares affecting GM and other companies, we know that older drivers are not the only group disproportionately likely to be involved in a runaway. Others include drivers who are short in stature, who are unfamiliar with the vehicle (parking-lot attendants, new buyers), and who are taking off from a stopped position or backing up. Publicly available reports do not yet indicate whether the Toyota crashes fit all of these patterns… however… the L.A. Times compilation of fatal accidents seems to contain a striking number of drivers who were immigrants.

[…]The widely recalled low point of the Audi controversy came when CBS’s 60 Minutes ran a grossly unfair hatchet job on the automaker, complete with a bogus simulation rigged up by an expert witness working with lawyers suing Audi. This time around, it was the turn of ABC’s Brian Ross, who used, yes, an expert witness hired by litigators suing Toyota to rig up a supposed simulation of electronic failure. (Toyota promptly showed that you could get the same silly, artificial result by hooking up other automakers’ vehicles in the same way.) Matt Hardigree of Jalopnik called the results “ridiculous” and a “hoax,” while Gawker — noticing some stealthily falsified footage of tachometer results — headlined its coverage “How ABC News’ Brian Ross Staged His Toyota Death Ride” and “ABC News’ Toyota Test Fiasco.”

My view is that this is being blown out of all proportion like other media-induced scares. Fear sells newspapers.

Homeschooling and vertical socialization

Here’s a post on homeschooling from Caffeinated Thoughts. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

When people ask about socialization they are usually wondering about “horizontal socialization.”  How much time are your kids interacting with children of their own age.  It is like some think that we cage our kids up and never let them be around other children.

If you wonder about this type of socialization, let me ask you a question…

If you stick a 6th grade boy with a bunch of 6th graders what is he going to learn to become?  Who will he be best equipped to interact with?

He will learn to be a “better 6th grader.”  He’ll be comfortable interacting with kids his own age.  How does that prepare him for life?  When else in life will he ever be faced with the same type of homogeneous age groupings?

Never.

You see my kids are socialized – “vertical socialization.”  My wife and I are the primary influencers, not their peer group.  Does anybody want to dispute that as not being a good thing?  You see my kids, and other homeschoolers don’t mold to the groupthink that says, “adults in general and parents in particular aren’t cool to talk to.”

Most homeschoolers naturally can carry on conversations with adults and are comfortable doing so.  I’ve gotten positive feedback from numerous adults about how my kids interact with them (as well as their behavior).  I’ve noticed that with other homeschooled children as well, you can easily carry on a conversation with them.  Why?

Because they are spending a lot of time with parents, other adults, older children, and younger children.  They are rarely in social settings where it is entirely kids of their own age.  I think this is a good thing, that’s life!  The homogenous age groupings you see in schools (which usually gets reinforced in church) isn’t real life, and does little to prepare a kid for the real world.

I wish that somehow parents were able to opt out of the public school system and get a voucher so that parents could use that money to purchase whatever education they think is a appropriate for their children, including homeschooling. I think that getting kids into the habit of interacting with adults is a good thing.