ReadersDigest.ca - Join the Debate: Your Response to Important News of the Day

JOIN THE DEBATE - YOUR RESPONSE TO IMPORTANT NEWS OF THE DAY

Do you think divorced fathers often get a raw deal?

For decades, they have been pictured as living the high life -- driving their Porsches, vacationing in exotic places -- while their former wives and their children haunt food banks and live off welfare. Branded as "deadbeat dads," they are viewed as heartless men who have simply walked away from their family responsibilities. The fact is, sure, there are some dads who fall into this category -- men who have fathered children but don’t want to honour their obligations to them -- but a closer examination reveals another story.

In general, statistics indicate that between 85 to 91 percent of Canadian children covered either by private or court-ordered child-support agreements actually receive payments, the vast majority receiving regular support payments. And statistics also reveal the close association between the regularity of payment and the frequency of contact between fathers and their children.

Studies also show that many noncustodial fathers who do not pay child support simply can’t afford to. Some are unemployed or on sick leave. In fact, one of the best predictors of nonpayment is the unemployment rate. Higher incomes are associated with higher compliance rates, and lower incomes with lower rates. One study suggests that a father’s ability to pay, in addition to his willingness to pay, determines the extent to which he fulfills his child-support obligations.

Burdened by unrealistic court- imposed support payments, continuing legal fees, increased taxes due to changes imposed by Bill C-41 and estrangement from their children, some men find themselves caught in a downward spiral of depression and have resorted to the ultimate escape: suicide. With a divorce, funds that were unable to support one household are now expected to support two. Add to this the cost of expensive litigation, the fact that one party may be trying to use money as a means of obtaining concessions such as access or custody, and we have a recipe for disaster -- with children often caught in the maelstrom

What happens after the break-up of the family? Eighty-seven percent of children end up living solely with their mothers after a parental separation (only 7 percent live with their fathers). Only 30 percent of children report visiting their fathers every week. One quarter of children visit their fathers irregularly -- once a month or on holidays. A whopping 15 percent never see their fathers.

And what has Bill C-41 done for fathers? Under the changes to the tax treatment of child support, which came into effect on May 1, 1997, it is no longer taxable in the hands of the receiving parent and no longer deductible in the hands of the paying parent. It is worthy of note that when the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada rose in Parliament to speak in favour of Bill C-41, he stated that the revenue derived from ending the deduction of child-support payments would yield the federal government more than an additional $1 billion dollars over a five-year period.

Finding solutions that are in the best interests of the children was the aim of the 1998 Senate-Commons Joint Committee on Child Custody and Access. Understanding that children of divorce are entitled to a close and continuing relationship with both parents, the committee recommended that the terms "custody" and "access" be stricken from the Divorce Act and a new term, "shared parenting," be incorporated. Both parents would have access to information and records regarding the child’s development and social activities, such as school and medical records and other relevant information. The federal government has apparently shelved the committee's recommendations, however, in the interests of further study.

Yes, there are some deadbeats who don’t care about their kids. But it’s unfair and unproductive to label every father who falls behind in his support payments a "deadbeat."

Date: January 08, 2002
Name:

Comments:
I am single mother with twin boys. I am just getting by from month to month. The father has not paid support in the last 3 months. I am on the support plan but nothing has been done yet, the system doesn't allow to use social insurance number to find where the father works because the federal gouvernment protects againts freedom of information. I don't agree with this law because I know the father is working and living with his mother. If people are afraid of dads committing suicide when you garnish their wages, who worry about the mothers who have to feed, clothe and put a roof over their children heads. Women sometimes have no choice to go on welfare, shelter etc... but they don't commit suicide. My ex knows the system and he is playing it to make me feel miserable. He feels that he is doing me a favor WHEN he pays his support. Without support plan, he probably wouldn't pay at all so should I commit suicide???

Date: December 28, 2001
Name: A.B.

Comments:
my bigest problem with maintence is that the money I pay to the ex does not go for the kids but to her for her to spend as she see fit. more often than not it does not go toward the children for extra activitys in their lives which I have to pay over and above the support payments not that I mind. But she does not have to prove that moneys is being spent on my children. they say its for rent and food, but if I was not here who would pay for rent,she would,so how come she does not have to prove where the moneys is going and for what. to go to the bar with her boyfriend, or buy clothes for herself. I would like to see a law in place so they have to prove to the courts or us fathers where the moneys is going. I don't like paying her the money because I don't know where the money is going, but I pay it anyways because I love my childern. yours truly. AAron

Date: November 22, 2001
Name: Gerry Loranger

Comments:
I have just read Myth of the Deadbeat Dad and I was appalled. I am not easily swayed but any media and I would not venture to judge the case based on the few facts that were presented. However, I must say, that the decisions of Maurice J. Herauf, regarding this issue, should be looked into carefully. And if there is any question as to the soundness or fairness of his decision, his cases' history should be thoroughly examined.

Sincerely,

Gerry J. Loranger
Cambridge, Ontario

Date: October 27, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
After reading this article and some of the responses from the readers, I have to ask why would anyone in their right mind EVER get involved with a divorced parent?

Let's see, if you marry a non-custodial parent and have children together there will always be the risk of an increase in child support payments made to spouse and kids #1, potentially to the detriment of spouse and kids #2. So, in a sense, the government forces the non-custodial parent to steal the food out the mouthes of the children from the second marriage in order to feed the children from the first marriage more. And if you marry a custodial parent you run the risk of ALSO having to pay child support if your relationship ends because you have stood "in place of a parent". So, the custodial parent can collect child support from TWO ex-spouses for support of the SAME child!? Wow! Where can I sign up for that deal? (the sarcasm is dripping off of that statement)

This is sickening! I'm a custodial parent who is in a relationship with a non-custodial parent. After hearing of these two incidents we looked at each other and said "that's EXACTLY why we can't ever get married or have children together". So much for trying to have a life after divorce.

Date: October 26, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I have some experience on both sides of this coin. I am a custodial parent who receives child support from my ex-husband, and I'm currently in a relationship with a non-custodial parent who pays support to his ex-wife.

My ex and I try to proactively work together to provide the best lifestyle and upbringing we can for our daughter without putting either one of us in the poor house. I am not living the "high life" and neither is he, and neither one of us is on the brink of financial ruin either. I do not think of the child support that he pays as "my money".

My boyfriend not only pays a substantial amount of child support to his ex-wife, but he also sends extras whenever he gets a call that "times are tough". The children are used as "guilt pawns". He consistently makes his payments on time, has never missed a payment for any reason, and covers all expenses associated with the cost of transporting the children between his home in Alberta and their mother's home in Ontario. Yet he is considered by his ex to be a "deadbeat dad" because he "ONLY" pays what the law dictates, when he "knows in his heart that the children deserve more."

What is really unfair is how our society views the lifestyles of divorced parents compared to their married counterparts. See a non-custodial father driving a new vehicle, regardless of its class, and one automatically presumes the children must be suffering in some way. Strange this association is not made when the driver of the new vehicle happens to be the custodial mother. If she's doing okay, than so must the children.

No one even looks twice when a married parent spends a little "extra" on themself or purchases an expensive "toy" or vacation. How does the snazzy little sport car that married mom and dad buy benefit their children? And why do we condem the non-custodial parent who works a little harder in order to buy themself a gift as a deadbeat?

Why is it written that anything extra the non-custodial brings home should go towards the children when we do not place the same expectation on married or custodial parents?

Date: October 20, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I think if one could see the court transcripts of exactly what happened in my case, it would send shivers up and down your spine.
It is as if they would preffer we were all in concentration camps.
I have lost all hope of ever controling my destiny. Legally my ex-wife who clearly hates me is using the courts to do her bidding.
They are no longer places of justice, they have become instraments of politcal policy.

Date: October 15, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Definitely! Since the new Child Support Guidelines came into effect on May 1, 1997, many non-custodial parents (mostly men) have been struggling financially. The guidelines base support payments on gross income and what the government feels is a fair amount. I have a feeling their is some hidden spousal support included in the amounts. The amounts are high enough that when faced with supporting a second family, standards of living are reduced drastically. I know this from experience of being the second wife.

My husband has always paid his support unless he was unemployed. He was even paying support for a boy who was four when he married his ex-wife. She never went after the real father to make him responsible, but when she and my husband separated, she made sure he paid for this child. His ex-wife has continually fought with him and instead of asking him to help pay for extras, such as glasses or medication, she would just take him to court for more money and reduced visitation.

When the Divorce Act was presented to Parliament for amendment in 1997 by Bill C 41, Parliament removed a clause that would allow for contiued child support for the purposes of education beyond the age of 18. Parliament rejected continuing education as a cause for Child Support. Unfortunately, they left a clause allowing judges to make the final decision. Judges continually make orders that force non-custodial parents to continue paying support beyond the age of 18 for the purposes of secondary school. They are creating law which has been ulitmately rejected by the highest court, Parliament of Canada. It is a form of discrimination against non-custodial parents because intact families (not divorced) are not required to provide secondary education to their adult children.

As a parent myself, I only want to do the best for my children. It has to be within my means. Growing up, I had to pay for many things myself, including my college education. I am not suffering because of it, in fact it has taught me to appreciate the little things too and that hard work pays off.

Many of the court orders made for non-custodial parents to continue paying beyond the age of 18 for the purpose of secondary education, or because they don't want to work and are still dependant on his or her parents are totally unfair. This is what creates people who still feel their parents owe them something when they are 30.

Date: October 15, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
But it’s unfair and unproductive to label every father who falls behind in his support payments a "deadbeat."

The question is good, but incomplete. It is unfair and unproductive to label every father a deadbeat. However, the perception of fathers in general in this country is also unproductive and unfair. Fathers are given a bad name in media, law, movies, books etc. all the time. For example, the ad on drinking and driving (I believe by Health Canada) that makes the father the drunk who is not there for his children. There are many more examples, but that is the one that angers me the most. In movies, fathers are portrayed as child molesters, kidnappers, abusers and overall neglecters.
Very few men I know are any of those things. They are good fathers, good family men and very hard workers. To answer “your” question, yes it is totally unfair to fathers. We live in a society where it is still remotely impossible for fathers to get custody of their children after separation, even though they may be the ideal candidates for custody. Fathers will need to hire the best lawyers in the country to even have a chance at sole custody and that doesn’t guaranty custody. It will only guaranty a very high lawyer bill.
The laws regarding family in this country do not necessarily favour women over men, but they do favour custodial parents over non-custodial parents. Custodial-parents, (yes mostly women) have access to a variety of laws, programs and services offered by both Federal and Provincial Governments to help cope with the issue of separation and/or divorce. Where are the laws, programs and services that would ensure non-custodial parents get the same treatment? For example: if a non-custodial parent doesn’t pay his/her support a month because he/she lost their job, why can’t they run to a court or a government agency with proof, and have their support award lowered temporarily? This would ensure that they do not fall behind in payments and would also ensure that the child receives money. The custodial parent can pick up the phone, call the province, and in an instant have pay-cheques garnished, how is that fair? Another example is access. How does the government deal with access in this country? Easy, they don’t. If a non-custodial parent is denied access to his or her child, there is nothing available to them to help with this situation. The government will tell you that you may go to court to get an order, but again that cost money.
Yes I am a non-custodial father and I do pay my support every month. I have the most wonderful 7 year-old daughter in the world. She is my love and my life. I was destroyed by the loss of my family when my ex-wife and I divorced four years ago. I call my daughter every day, some times just to tell her I love her. And yet, in society, movies, media and law, I am the “bad one”. I am one of many fathers who are just like me. There are so many other issues to raise in this message, but as I mentioned in my opening paragraph, I believe that the issue is much greater then non-payment of support awards and the labelling of “deadbeat”. However, labelling us as we do in this country, no matter how it is done is as horrible as labelling every Muslem a terrorist.

Date: September 16, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
My son-in-law has REFUSED to pay child support. I support the rights of fathers who deserve them. Our family is dealing with a situation in which the father has gone to the nth degree to exercise his "rights" at the cost of the PHYSICAL and EMOTIONAL well being of my granddaughter. He DOES NOT display a devoted love as her father. He exposes her to health hazards, denies her medical treatment, an unacceptable atmosphere that includes excessive drinking and drugs as a result of his "occupation". He has REFUSED to pay any support for his daughter while he's living the "good" life and my daughter and granddaughter are scraping by with our help.

This is wrong, and what's worse the courts are allowing this to happen. Despte how most responses seem to indicate the Mother always wins in court and despite the courts claim to consider ONLY what is in the best interest of the child, and despite my daughter's fight for her daughter's welfare, the only thing that seems to matter is that he is the father of the child and as a result, he has "rights". The baby's welfare is not what's important. The push for father's rights is the only issue being addressed here. But at what cost?

My granddaughter, at 19 months old, is already displaying emotional problems as a result of the courts decision to pass her back and forth everyday during the course of a week. Most times the baby is left with a babysitter while in his possession.

But what can we do? They live in another province with no support system. He won't let them come home ... not because he is such a devoted father -because it's his "right". The one person being hurt the most in this mess is the baby - but he doesn't care. As long as the court says he has the "right", he will insist on exercising it.

What has to happen to my granddaughter before the court decides that this is wrong .... all wrong?

Date: September 06, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I have watched over the years the way my husband is abused by the family law system and the family responsibility office in Ontario.

Every chance his x-wife gets she chips away at him. Demanding more and getting more.

As Canadians we scoff at the American litigation process because of it's ridiculous awards as outlined below in a recent ruling:

May 2000: A Philadelphia restaurant was ordered to pay a Lancaster, Pennsylvania, woman $113,500 after she slipped on soft drink and
broke her coccyx. The beverage was on the floor because the woman threw it at her boyfriend 30 seconds earlier during an argument.

What is so different about the rulings in Canada concerning the financial awards to x-wives? None!

It takes two to have a marriage, it takes two to have a dispute. So why is it the husband burdened finacially and the x-wife gets what she wants? Especially if child support is not an issue.

I say to the Canadian Family Law, wake up. Your awards are just as silly as the award in the above mentioned Philadelphia case. How dare you scoff at the American system when you are just as trivial! Shame on you!!!!

Date: September 06, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I havedealt with the court system regarding child suport, andfound it to be harsh with no murcey as u state they can susppened your licence for no payment. Yet on the other hand of acess to your children if ur denied rarley is their any action taken against the mother. Is that fair both harm the children

Date: September 05, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Most fathers do not see Child Support as Support for the Children, rather only see the support as going to their ex wives, therefore, the huge cause of DEADBEAt DADS. Alot of men, due to the fact that they do not want to pay their ex wives, often, go on short term disability or long term disability, even resort to quitting their jobs and taking much lower paying jobs, or even resort to quitting and going on welfare. Much I feel to the DEADBEAT theory is due to anger and maliciousness towards the ex spouse, completely forgetting the factor that the child support is to pay for the childrens food, clothing, heat & lights, roof over their heads, hot water for their bath or showers, vehicle to get them from school and activities. Often the DEADBEATS that are complaining about the childsupport payments being too high, have no idea what it takes to bring up the children and only see it as free money for the ex. Much to the same degree there were previous comments about the ex living high in the hog while the so called DEADBEAt can't afford to run his own household. Looking at the ex spouse you will likely find that they are not living on easy street but are also out there working 9-5 and still trying to be both mother and father to the children. Funny too, these so called DEADBEAT DADS are finding the Child Support payments so extremely high but go on to remarry and take on additional families. Alot of times not only once but twice and sometimes three times. Something is wrong here.... I know we shouldn't categorize all Fathers, because right now I do know of three Fathers that do support their children and do make sure that they have regular visits. But most divorced people that I know, the husband is doing everything in his power to not pay, only sees his children on rare occasions when it is okay with his schedule or new family, have the nice care and nice condo or house, but all seem to blame the ex spouse on lack of contact and bleeding them dry. I am so sick of these stories.
In New Brunswick they said their is a new law where the DEADBEAT DAD will have his drivers license revoked and would be put in Jail. I have yet to see ONE...... and have talked to different people that work with the family court system who say the same. It is a joke and a disgrace.

Date: September 03, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I think father's are getting a raw deal. My commonlaw husband is currently fighting to keep custody of his five year old son. He is a loving, dedicated parent both to his son and to my two children. His son's mother seldom displayed any interest in the child, even when they all lived together. Now, however, after learning that you do not get any financial support without actually having the child, guess who wants her son. The frightening thing is, because she is a woman (and i can say this, being a woman myself).. she might actually get this child, and the financial support she's looking for. Our lawyer tells us that it all depends on the judge hearing the case, and how sympathetic he is to a woman's cause. Huh? What about her leaving her son? What about her disinterest in him for five years? What about my husband's unfaltering love, care, and nurture of this child? The good fathers and the decent men should not pay for the sins of other men.

Date: September 02, 2001
Name: charles brick

Comments:
i'm in the same boat as other men but i did apply for relief i was granted no payments for 2 years on arrears. and one year on no payments it can be done with out a lawyer but my sister did help. i'm disabled from a accient in 1987. the judge was female and understood my plight and grant my relief. my son stays with me all summer and holidays i buy his school supplies and clothes. the fact is sweden has the right idea becuse i live buy these rules and my sons mother is happy. so men keep trying you can win the unwinabl fight.

Date: August 27, 2001
Name: Chris Lang

Comments:
Yes, fathers definitely get a raw deal - in fact they get much worse than that! They are forced to pay huge amounts of child support that are far above their earnings, while having to support their own cost of living, perhaps with a new family. While I do believe they should contribute to the upbringing of their children, it should be based on their current earnings and be well within their means to pay. Spouses should not be allowed to run to court to have it upped everytime they're "mad" at him or he gets a bit of a raise. Support should also be limted to his children, and not to the ex-wife. He should also have undisputed access to his children regularly unless there is proven reasons why he shouldn't, such as child abuse or drug/alcohol abuse, etc.

Date: August 23, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I am personally going through divorce and am having problems tying to convince my exwife that we should have joint custody of our daughter. She wants full custody and to make all the desisions for my 8 year old daughter. I am no way an abusive father and my daughter spends a lot of time with me. I wish to have joint custody and also would like equal time with her is this not fair? I feel that this will end up in the court system before long and figure I will likely be the looser. I have gone through some very tough times and have also ended up on anti depresants like so many of us do. I feel that my wife may hold this over my head and use it in court that I am an unfit parent.

Although I try to make the regular payments I have been receiving letters from her lawyer on a when I happen to be a few days late with the payment, is this not herasment! Sometimes I have to resort to my line of credit as all my expences add up to more then I make.
My ex has been nice to my face but she must speak with a forked tongue, as the nasty stuff just keeps on coming from the lawyer.

It is really ashame that it has resorted to this as I feel I am a fair and a resposible father.
This has gone way overboard for us fathers who want and will within our powers to support our children. The government must not discriminate against us. Marriage is a two way street and both parents are to blame for its failure. Why are the fathers being unfaily punished in this matter? The government must take a look at what it has done as well as the court system. It appears to me that the courts give more rights to the criminals then they do to the fathers of failed marriages.
I can really see why some fathers would resort to suicide, wouldn't you if you had only a few dollars a month to live on?

All divorced fathers out there we need to stand up and be heard! Write to your MP'S write the courts and organize. We need to ask that we get the rights we deserve!

Date: August 23, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Why is it so many women thing the CHILD support is their personal windfall and not for the child?

Date: August 23, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
How can women say that men don't get a raw deal. I just read in a well know Canadian Magazine that a women is seeking a payment of 10 million and a monthly 100,000 Divorce settlement.It's stated that if granted this will set a "Canadian Support Record".Guee now it's who gets the most money and lets put it in the Guiness World Records. It looks to me that this is the way things are going.It also goes on to say that they were only Married for "3 Months" The amount of 15,000 she gets now is not enough per month to cover the 27,000 per month she spends on the kids and herself.I believe that these vindictive women need to spend some time in a third world country, and see what it is like to be poor.Women have no idea how well they have it here in Canada. They only see what more they can get. Women need to remember that it was our men who fought in the First and Second World War for our freedom. What happened to the old tune our Mothers use to hum " Stand By Your Man" And the marrage vow " For Better or Worse Till Death Do We Part.You may feel what you are doing for the Sake Of Your Children is Right.You may want to judged men now here on earth but in due time you will be by a more powerful Judge.

Written by a women who is a meninist

Date: August 21, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
There are a lot of good fathers struggling because of an unfair system. Many fathers today are responsible caregivers and just as capable of looking after there children and yet the "system" treats us all the same, like a lesser parent.

Date: August 18, 2001
Name: Cheryl

Comments:
I also have posted in the past.
Until one is in a situation, or knows someone in a like situation,one is not aware of the extent of the 'TRAVESTY' of our so-called justice system.
We have demonstrated, handed out flyers and tried to get a support group started in our area.
My partner and I both work, and we both pay child support. We have our children with us every weekend.
Where does all this leave us?
Well, when our car eventually breaks down, we will not have the money to get it fixed. We need this car to get back and forth to work.
You know, there is just so much I would like to say and vent, but I really don't know where to begin. And I'm tired of dwelling on it. It takes so much energy and leaves a depressing and helpless feeling. But it's hard not to dwell on it when you're living it day to day.
I'm sure those of you going through this know exactly what I'm talking about.
Thank you Canada.
This is the first year that I stayed home on Canada Day and did nothing to celebrate it.
What a farce!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How can I put on a smile and wave the Canadian flag when Canada has done what it has. Not only to me, but to thousands of other non-custodial parents.
Proud to be Canadian?
Nope.
I'm ashamed.

Date: August 15, 2001
Name: R. M.

Comments:
I have previously posted my 2 cents worth and have since done some digging as to why the laws are the way they are. Worse yet, I now know why "they" will do nothing about it!
I met with MLA's from each party on the issue of father's rights, child support guidelines, ect...
The Honorable MLA for the Liberal party, put it this way and to the best of my recollection, here are his words:
"Do not expect any changes to occur as a result of petitions or any other form of complaints for change to the divorce act because the government is under pressure from a certain women's group to do nothing!"

Many of you responded to the Reader's Digest article demanding change!
Because we have no voice and because a certain women's group is so loud and well funded, we as men have no chance of seeing justice done anytime soon.

I also found it amazing that no MLA's knew anything about this Reader's Digest article or this message board.
Again, thank you Reader's Digest for your article.
"Father's battling against injustice" is one of several Canadian sites where you will find some answers to your questions.
Kind regards to all.

Date: August 12, 2001
Name: Dyan Matheson

Comments:
Yes, there are a VERY few deadbeat dads, but I feel there are more "Lounge Chair Lizzard Moms". This is due to the Judicial system we now have in place... they (the courts) tell the mom to sit back and relax and they will go after the father, instead of forcing and helping the mom to find support on her own...It took 2 to make this family and it should take 2 to monetary support it.... cooking, cleaning & washing is not a monetary support... I feel that automatically custody should be 50/50. Or if the mother does not have a job when the family splits but the dad does, he should get full custody, with the mother having very good visiting rights, while she takes a training course to enable her to go back to work. If she cannot afford the course then the welfare system should pay for it.. when she obtains a job and is earning money then the custody should go 50/50.
Too much pressure is put on fathers and they will take off..

Date: August 12, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I have some personal experience with this.
I have a brother-in-law who has one child with his previous spouse. He has been paying the same child support for at least ten years. In that time his income has fluctuated and he has gone form a mid five figure salary, to nothing, to a low five figure salary.
During these difficult times in his life he has had no opportunity to change his support payments. If he wanted to change them he would have had to go to court and pay legal costs that would have far exceded what he would have saved by getting them changd.
It has nothing to do with wanting to support his child. He WANTED to make the payments, but was unable to.
By the way, during this difficult period, his ex-spouse began living with a six figure income significant other. Of course, because they never got married, he still had to make his payments. And still couldn't afford to combat them legally.
His spouse, who has legal custody, also made it impossible for him to visit his child. Oh, yeah, that's fair...

Date: August 10, 2001
Name: karla

Comments:
Men always get a raw deal if the woman wants to be unreasonable. The court system always sides with women. The current system still sees women as poor, dependent souls that must be taken care of. As a woman, I find this generalization an INSULT. Gone are the days of TRADITIONAL roles in marriage. That's not to say that a couple can not choose to have a traditional role but it is a CHOICE based on the knowledge that your marriage only has a 50/50 chance of surviving. If the marriage fails, no person should be responsible for paying spousal support. The spouse that wasn't working (usually the woman) should be grateful that they had an opportunity to stay home for as long as they did. Why should ongoing support be expected? Yes, they were use to a certain lifestyle but the ex was also use to having the house clean and dinner on the table. Is the ex-wife still going to provide those services? They will get 50% of the assets accumulated during the marriage, and that should be it! I find it absolutely amazing that there are some women that feel they are ENTITLED to a monthly payment after the marriage has ended. Even an employer who unjustly fires an employee only has to pay a one time settlement to an employee based on the amount of time the person was employed! Spousal support can be for life! What is also amazing is that judges will award women 50% of their ex's pension (payable upon divorce) and then when the ex retires, the monthly payments still continue! Isn't that double dipping??? Pretty soon no finacially successful man will ever marry for the fear of a lifetime commitment should she leave him! Our government is making laws that make marriage extremely unappealing to a lot of men. If things don't change soon, marriage will become a thing of the past!

Date: August 10, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Divorce and Family Law is a complex problem in Canada, not just the law, but, the working of the law. It allows for rampant abuse by vindictive spouses who have been the primary care-givers of the children (or the stay at home parent).
There is a standard pattern for the abuse:
1- Leave with the children and without the other spouses knowledge or permission.
2- Stay at a friend or relative's house so that the cost of living is minimal.
3- Sue for interim custody, child support and spousal support; all will be awarded, unconditionally.
4- Then use the support money fron the paying spouse to pay your lawyer to retain what you have got on the interim, make it permanent and restrict access between the children and the paying spouse. Over the next two, or so,
years that follow you will financially and emotionally ruin the paying spouse for they will be paying support, their lawyer and at the same time, trying to maintain a standard of living such that their children would still want to spend time with them.

Over 90% of you will be female.

Few paying spouses can withstand an attack of such magnitude, I know as I have been there. I went into more debt, 10s of thousands of dollars just to get close to a fair deal which allows access between my children and myself.
Worth it? Every penny.
And about the emotional strain? It is something that no person should have to go through, let alone for almost two years (and it never even went to trial).

How can it be stopped? (along with some of the other nonsense).

1- The system has to first has to observe all parties as being equal, (unless it is not in the best interests of the children). This will reverse the current context of the law wherein one party takes the children and claims, (for practical purposes of the analogy), innocence. The other party then, is guilty until proven innocent which they have to do in court.
When divorce occurs, unless there is adultry or abuse, both parties are guilty of it and therefore should be treated equally from the start. Therefore no party gets to take the children and challenge the other party on access and support.
2- Next the system has to restructure to arbitration, rather than confrontation, expeditiously. Give the two parties 30 days from separation date to mutually work things out. At the end of the 30 days if an agreement is worked out then a court order is written for a standard fee. If agreement cannot be reached then a standard fee is paid and it automatically goes to arbitration and is over within another 30 days. This will have the most minimum impact on the children as time will not allow for manipulation of them by parties and family homes will not be sold for profit to use as war chests, and support payments will go to the children and not for lawyers fees.
If one of the parties does not like the arbitrators decision then they challenge the system and hire a lawyer to fight the system, not the other party. Hence the system defends its decision against the hostile party and the other party free to go about its business without the normal financial and emotional abuse.

This framework would be a giant leap in the right direction for the majority of people caught up up in the current Canadian divorce game.

Date: August 10, 2001
Name:

Comments:

I am a father of two beautiful boys, ages 6 and 4. I have been assessed by the courts to pay the sum of $1700/month in child support. This took into account all my overtime that was voluntary but worked by me to provide my wife with whatever she wished. Because of this levy and the fact that overtime was eliminated when I was placed in a different position at my place of employment, has made it very difficult for me to meet any obligations,( rent, car payment, insurance for auto and home), and the income tax ( currently being called to see when I will be paying the additional $5200 that is owing because I had to cash in my RRSP's to meet the court mandated lump sum payment that is over and above the support payments. I'll lose the car soon and probably everything else. My fear is not beeing able to provide for my boys the way that they deserve. They are my life and even though money is not the root of happiness, it does assist in allowing them the learning experiences out there that require an admittance fee. They come to me in tattered clothes that my 80year old mother mends for me, while their step sister
and step brother enjoy new clothes,sports equipment,shoes, etc. They are the GOLDEN BOYS - to me in one very special way and to the home in which they reside in another. The quality of life has improved immensely since the courts and the lady judge saw fit to curb their fathers ability to provide fo them the way that I feel they should be. My time with them ranges from 40-54% of the total between their mother and myself. What do I do? Things will never change to allow me the ability to fulfill my promise to each of them, a promise made shortly after their birth. Oh, did I mention that I was born in 1943 and will be 58 years of age on the 15 of August? A time when I should be able to provide more for them is lost. It does however allow their mother the luxury of missing work when she wishes. If only that missed time was spent with the boys, but alas, life was evidently not meant to be fair.

Date: August 08, 2001
Name: Dave

Comments:
"Dead Beat Dads"

One interesting point that the Child Support Agency here in the UK has discovered is that those women whose children with their father (and are therefore required to pay child support) have a much higher non compliance rate than fathers. Obviously the number of women who do this is considerably smaller than men but this is only because 95% of the time the children remain with the mother.

If however say father were automatically given residency of their children the number of women who would not pay ANYTHING to the upkeep of their children would be far higher than the current figures for males here in the UK.

DEADBEAT DADS - WHAT WOULD WE CALL MOTHERS!!!!!!

I have residency of my two children from my previous marraige, their mother never has and never will contribute financially to their upbringing. Instead she has had another children with her new partner.

Is this avoidance of CS payments, is she a deadbeat mother, I don't know but what I do know is if as a result of unrealistic child support payments a male was to give up work then he would be labelled a "Dead Beat Dad".

Date: August 07, 2001
Name: Nikki

Comments:
I think the non custodial "parent" often gets a raw deal. Most of all the children suffer. The courts have to start dealing with the children's issues. Both parents should have to take mandatory parenting classes so that they "BOTH" raise their kids to be the best they can be. If the parents can't deal with each other amicably, neither of them should raise those kids. (not speaking of abusive or questionable actions, but everyday people that divorce badly)

Date: August 07, 2001
Name: a gormanly

Comments:
A vastly more balanced report than the one printed june 1999 in the UK edition, i would be pleased if you would forward a copy of your report to the UK office forthwith for them to reprint here. Thank you for your fairness.

Date: August 04, 2001
Name: E.T.

Comments:
Deadbeat "PARENTS" are a problem, be they male or female. I think that both parents should be help responsible for their children, finacially and emotionally. And yes, both are given equal rights to apply for custody,(joint or total), visitation etc. It is their decision whether or not to fight for what they want. And if they don't, please stop whining. As a parent who's Ex is now 5 months in arrears for child support, and who has made a conscious descion to "opt out" of visitation, don't expect much sympathy from me. Garnish away!!

Date: July 31, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
My brother is going through the motions of being destroyed, which is what "she" said she would do, and she has the law behind her. He will have to live in a one bedroom basement suite for the rest of his life. He has no place for his four kids to stay when they visit. He can not afford to feed them when they are with him, let alone do anything with them.

She is an intelligent woman with the same skills as I do, but refuses to look for a job. She has not worked outside of the home (she did my brother's bookkeeping) since the birth of their fourteen year old. The lawyers told my brother, that is his problem, he must support her.

My brother has never carried any money with him as it is. She kept tight control over the money he made, while he worked fifty or more hours a week. Now she wants blood and the law says she gets it.

I have heard too often of this story. I know that there are deadbeats, but it is extremely unfair to classify every man under this category.

Date: July 31, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
The "Raw Deal" extends further beyond the monetary hardships imposed by Canadian Courts and in my opinion much importantly around the issue of Access to your child. Sweden is light years ahead in providing reasonable access to ones child through joint custody. As a recently separated Father I am only happy to provide all the financial necessities to allow my daughter (currently age two years)all the advantages I can provide. However, put in a very vindictive wife (who by the way was the one who initialized the divorce proceedings) and that leaves one very distraught Father. My story seems like an old cliche - Wife gets pregnant to get husband - Husband with old fashion values complies - Wife takes husband to the cleaners and then sues for divorce. The disturbing part is although it seems logical to me that I should be given ample access to our child this is not at all the case. It takes thousands of dollars in legal fees and court appeals which returns the resulting shocking access - Sunday access only from 10:00 to 6:00. Allowing for the fact that your wife has now relocated half-way across the city and your daughter sleeps for approximately two hours during your visit leaves 4 hours of glorious quality time with your daughter - Ridiculous! Plus now add in that your wife rarely follows the court order (however, she seems to be getting better lately) leaves you with no choice but to go back to the courts or bring in the law. The story doesn't end here and I feel sorry for fathers who don't have the financial means or in my case family support. My advise to all fathers is to try to keep as far away from the courts as possible and to settle issues "amicabley" and if not find the best lawyer you can - your going to need it!

Date: July 31, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I have just finished reading your April issue, in particular the article on "Deadbeat Dads" and just had to respond! These men do not deserve the title of deadbeat dad or deadbeat parent, but unfortunately our society has chosen to group them together with the truly low of low. Having spent six days in court during the last two years, trying to collect support from a truly deadbeat my sympathies are extended to their families.

A true deadbeat parent (be it dad or mom) is one who shuns his children and all responsibilities thereof. Who selfishly cares about themselves and their level of life before that of their children, not only financially but emotionally as well.

It is unfortunate that our society groups all dads/moms who pay support in the same category. Unfortunately everyone suffers, and in the long run it's the children that suffer the most! I agree that the parents who neglect their responsibility should be given the title "Deadbeat", after all they have worked harder to earn that title than that of a loving caring parent!

Date: July 31, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I have been paying child-support for 11yrs, I had my children every week-end and took them on several vacations as well as allowance. I have since remarried and I have a better job. Every effort was made to include my children in every thing that was done in the family but the kids could not accept my new wife and stepkids. My ex-wife decided to take me to court for more money, she did this 3 times, twice she started and stopped. Each time this started my kids would did not want to see me. We are going throught it a 3rd time, this time it has gone to court, it has been months and there has been no judgement handed down as of yet.
I am now allianted from my kids, my ex-wife used them to get information from them that she could use in the courts. Alls I can hope for now is that in the future my kids will come and see me again, maybe when the are not influnced by their mother. But for now all I have is memorys to hang on to in the hope that someday they will come arround.
Obviously I cann't give you all the details in this letter but it has not been a pretty situation for me over these past year. I just hope that the laws will change so many others will not have to go through the same thing.

Date: July 27, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I agree completely with what is written above. I believe that we should look for JUSTICE, not whether a person is male or female. Right now I'm aware of three fathers who are getting a raw deal. It seems that the only thing on the mind of their former partners is to punish them. How many more desperate men committing suicide must happen before something is done! Don't the men have a right to live after separation? Something has to be done to correct these injustices! and soon!

Date: July 27, 2001
Name: ANN CLARE

Comments:
Yes, I do believe dads get a bad rap. Children can and are used as pods in a divorce. Both parents should shared in the parenting, unless there are abusive situations. I believe that the courts should allocate payments based on actual daycare expenses submitted by the custody parent of clothing, extra curriculum activities, percentage (if not joint custody)of mortgage, lights, food, etc., and not be on a based amount. This should be revisited on a monthly or yearly basis. I have seen situations where mothers are given a base amount per month and not spend on the children. I also believe counselling should not be an option. I also believe that not necessarily the mother is the best parent. I also believe divorce parents should (or forced)not relocate to a different city, town, province or country until the child is of an age of maturity. If the parent who needs to relocate, it should be a mutual consent of everyone involve including the courts and counsellors.

Date: July 24, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I live in the US, but things here are roughly
equal to Canada. I won't bore you with my story,
but due to ny ex-wife's selfish cruelty, I was
seperated from my daughter for 21 years, and I
just recently began seeing her but only because
her mom decided to be generous and allow her to!
(She still lives with Mommie Dearest, under her
thumb, and it is a fact: often women with sole
custody brainwash the kids, lie, lie, lie and lie again! Please don't say this can't happen, and
that I must have done something wrong! I didn't.
I left my ex the house, paid CS even though
I had custody of my son. EQUAL ACCESS MUST BE
APPLIED IN ALL CASES. NO EXCEPTIONS.

I wonder how eager women would be to pay CS if
things were reversed whereby men had custody most
of the time, and they(women) hadn't seen their kids
for months or years?

In regard to single moms: many of he men who don't
pay support didn't want to be parents, but only
women have reproductive choice!!!

SOME mothers are shortchanged, but all in all,
saying hey get the worst of it is like saying
rape hurts the rapist far more than the victim.

Date: July 23, 2001
Name:

Comments:
It was with great dismay that I read your article in your publication. I feel that you did not provide all the information re. both sides of the story and as a result, you showed a slanted view with mothers being painted as money grabbing and greedy.

In many cases the Ontario Govt. has acted without the request of the women involved to collect child support from the fathers typified in your article. I know personally of one case in which the father is indeed having his wages garnished and has started a smear campaign against his wife. When she pointed out to him that this was hurting the children, (his side of the family refuse to speak to the three dependents), he replied that although she may not have started the proceedings, she had the power to stop them. This is untrue. The only way for her to convince the Ontario Govt. to drop the case is to declare that he has been paying support. This, in addition to being an outright lie, would raise her income and she would have to pay for money that she in reality does not have.

How many other women are in this no win situation? Should she lose her low income apartment and the services that she has now in sympathy for her husband? Should the children be made to suffer because of this?

My husband and I seperated after 13 years of marriage. He has never paid a penny of support for his children. When it became apparent that this was to lead to a divorce, he quit his job so that he would not have to pay towards the support of his kids.

In this case it is the children who suffer the most. It is all well and good to have sympathy for the poor fathers, but you did not speak of the lives of the wife and children of your examples. Are they living hand-to-mouth as I and my children are? I would be greatly surprised if you told me that they were living the life of ease, that has not been my experience and I have seldom seen it in real life.

Date: July 19, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
It is not an easy question to answer and as many cases that you could put that there are men being drained dry, there are cases of men who are scamming the system and not paying for their children...The system itself fails because it is an adverserial system where the person who responded that the children are the ones who lose is the most correct. It is an issue that takes more than an easy response -- women do not and likely not in the near future will ever have the earning power that men have. That is not a gripe that is a reality. Women who can not get payments from Dad's can tell you how it is to live in poverty...and looking at marital breakdowns it is statisticly known that most is when men leave to "start" that new family with someone else...BUT in fairness and justice I also know some dads that are paying quite a penalty in child support while the mother has remarried and is living comfortably supported but look at those stats too -- how many men really take on another man's children as responsibility or say -- HE can pay for his own kids....so there are more facets then just Dads are being bled dry...from very close knowledge not all dads have paid for their own children. I had a university sociology prof tell me that when men finally support women's issues of injustice (ie wage differences for same work) then and only then will they see the tides change and he is on to his fourth or fifth family life...

Date: July 17, 2001
Name: william coles

Comments:
to many times men are forced into financial ruin because of the extremely unfair child support laws.with 1/3rd of the gross paycheck per child going for support, leaves a man with 3 children an unrealistic amount of money to support himself.It doesn,t matter in some cases if the wife has a better paying job or not that evil dad must pay through the nose.A man making 17.00 dollars an hour with 3 kids will pay close to 950.00 a month.Now unless your extremely rich when has anyone bought 950.00 worth of clothes and food for the kids each and every month of the year?Now let,s not forget that the wife is still working and making just as much as the husband.That,s just a little bit of the scenario, no wonder some commit suicide,the law is all onesided,for women.

Date: July 15, 2001
Name: Charlotte Santella

Comments:
I honestly think that although there are definitely some deadbeat dads out there, we cannot assume that they all are. In my experience as a teacher, I have come across so many wonderful dads who have such little time with their kids, yet would give up their life for them. You never hear about the mothers who take off and abandon their kids though, do you? Well let me tell you that they are out there too. It would be nice if people would not just assume things and give all the divorcees the benefit of the doubt.

Date: July 14, 2001
Name: Rene

Comments:
As an emergency paramedic I have witnessed the end result of too many men who were destroyed emotionally, financially and in the end physically as a direct result of unjust divorce laws. Now it is happening to me.

I've read the many responses to Reader's Digest article and wish to thank the good folks at Reader's Digest for bringing this injustice to the public eye.

I fear that the good people who've responded here will go unoticed, yet their many comments demand a change. I call on everyone who is directly and indirectly affected by these unjust laws to take action.

I am willing to start a petition to speak for those who have found it kinder to end their lives, and for those who are at the end of their rope! Please, PLEASE get involved and protect the rights of everyone, not just x wives.

I call on you to support the rights of good fathers everywhere and end the misery caused by the Canadian divorce laws.

If you wish to get involved, email me at:
renmay@telusplanet.net
Or fax me at: 403-327-1601

Without your support, men are doomed to a life of misery, and occasionally a tragic and unecessary death.
We can talk about it and we can do something about it.
Sign me as one good father who didn't want this to happen to him and is now treated like a criminal for it while his x lives a much better life.

Rene

Date: July 13, 2001
Name: Jennifer Massey

Comments:
Do fathers get the raw deal.... Wow I cannot understand how people forget about the children invovled. YOu know the ones who this is REALLY effecting! I understand that there are times when the system doesn't work the way it should but you have to think of the childrens best interest because this it what the system looks at! Yes this can be unfair but so is the seperation of parents to children! Unless you have been a child of divorsed parents then you would not be able to understand the impact that this would have on a child. The last thing that people should be thinking about is how much money thet are going to have when it is all said and done =0)

Date: July 10, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Yes I think some father's get a raw deal but the results of my recent trial which were published in all major newspapers across Canada would seem to demonstrate that it is not simply a gender issue.

I was the major earner in my household ($80,000 gross). I was also the primary child care giver (a ridiculous term of great use to the government when it comes to getting more money out of the higher earner in the household at income tax time or after a marital breakdown). The judge chose to think otherwise. I guess she couldn't fathom the idea that one could be both.

I had a marriage contract which the judge claimed she upheld but did everything she could to make a mockery out of it. I was treated with disrespect and even insulted by her in her decision; the woman knows nothing about me.

Finally, I was left with minus $3,000 to live on; that is to pay rent, eat, etc.

I understand the complaints of many men of having been left with no access because of poverty, distance, no car and depression. I understand how spouses manipulate the children, but in this case it was the father manipulating the children. I understand how the courts ruin everything you have worked for and attempted to achieve for your children, how the courts, hiding behind a thin veil they call the best interests of the children, destroy your children's future as well as yours. I also understand why men abandon their children; I almost did myself - I almost left the country, without the slightest feeling of regret. Any country that allows courts to treat parents and children like this country does in a supposedly free and democratic society is not worth losing sleep over. I also understand how the courts treat the higher earner as if he/she was having a lark out there in the work force or in carrying out his/her business. Indeed, the judge in my case concluded that I chose to focus more on my own career development and job than my children (which was no doubt a surprise to my employer who offers generous family leave, including full salary maternity leave and other policies to facilitate employees with their family responsibilities - which I made ample use of.) However, the point is that this is not a gender issue and if the battle is put forth on this front, it will not be won.

We need policy changes such as the following :
1) changes that will make judges accountable for their ridiculous rulings - even the ability to sue them with public funds 2) a fund to suit incompetent lawyers, including incompetent children's lawyers 3) an ability to pay based on net salary and the need to pay based on the lower earning spouse's ability to earn 4) absolute respect by the courts of freely entered into marriage, pre-nuptial and separation agreements 5) a judicial system that does not allow judges and children's lawyers to claim their conclusions are based on the best interests of the children with out an elaboration in detail of exactly how their ruling is in the best interests of the child and how an alternative ruling is not so that they can be taken to task and held accountable 6) more openness on the part of the appeal courts to over turn custody decisions of lower courts 7) no spousal support for someone who can work or just because that spouse earns less 8) spouses receiving support should be required to produce financial statements four times a year demonstrating where the other spouse's money has been spent 9) support payments should be directly payable to the children once they are 18 years of age and any decision to support children after this date for university or whatever, should be left to the parent who will have to pay and 10) parents who have to pay support should have the option of holding back a portion of the support money for him or her to spend on the children (e.g. clothing) themselves. I can assure you that if more decision making on the expenditure side were left to the non-custodial parent, the non-custodial parents would be seeing their children more often.

Of course, what is also needed on the part of the courts is a better understanding of Canadian families - not some limited stereotypical one; father's are no longer having their slippers brought to the door and a meal prepared when they come home from work. Many of them have to change diapers and then cook their own meal and that of the children.

As for feminism, true feminism means earning your own way and being independent. As far as I'm concerned, many of the cases I have read in your long list of replies are the result of the courts seeing women as dependents, even women with pretty big salaries. I find it disgusting that a spouse, male or female, would pose as a dependent in this day and age. It made sense to support women after marriage in days where they were not allowed to work or pursue a career. In 2001, I find the courts idea of dependency archaic. In fact, if some husband actually supported his wife to stay at home to raise the children for a certain number of years, she should consider herself lucky - it was a luxury and a sacrifice on the part of the husband not on her part.

Now what has the Canadian Bar Association recently decided...taking all rights away from parents and then treating them like children by drawing up a parenting plan for each. Considering that when men lost control over the marital breakdown process, true power and authority went to the state (i.e. the courts) and not women, I think it is time we all woke up and told the state what is in the best interest of the child and the family and put aside the gender quibble. And I can assure you, that more paternalism on the part of the state is not what we need. A gender quibble will play right into even greater state control.

So this is my two cents worth for now.

Date: July 09, 2001
Name:

Comments:
When I read your article I could not beleive what I was reading and how it is parelling my own divorce problems. I have been seperated for two years and divorced for almost one year. I have three teenage children who live with their mother. We divorced after twenty years of a bad marriage, the last ten or so living pratically living seperate lives. When I left home I said let's keep the lines of communication open and not make the lawyers rich. She originally agreed to this. Two years later the only communication we have is thru lawyers and I am out ten thousand dollars on legal bills. She has dragged me to court five times unecessarily on issues I agree with or to. I have suffered through having my wages seized, for support she had post dated cheques for, by the Family Responsibility Office. This was done with no notice to me. Being a male they do not want to talk to you and even though I was paying my monthly support no one could get these people to stop. Once they finally did they would not release money seized by them, back to me for almost a year.My ex wife did this as a back up plan in case I did not give her monthly cheques in a years advance (she already had them). I loose half of my take home pay in support with no tax relief. My ex is constantly trying to get more money from me. I have no problem paying support, but I have a life to live as well. The whole process is like living a nightmare that just goes on and on. When will it ever end.

Thanks for listening.

Date: July 08, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
In response to Kathy "I am a Family Lawyer" Baird back at the beginning of these postings basically saying that the current system works. "HELLO"... has she not read what most people have posted!!!!!!!!!! THE CURRENT SYSTEM DOES NOT WORK, IS NOT FAIR.. THE POOR OLD DADS ARE GETTING SCREWED BIG TIME AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN... THEY HAVE LOST THEIR KIDS, THEIR INCOMES, ANY FUTURE INCOME, THEIR HOMES, THEIR SELF RESPECT. STOP THIS NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is about time that the MOMS started PAYING FOR THE CHILDREN ALSO, and be ACCOUNTABLE for any money receieved from the Paying Parent WHICH SHOULD BE FOR THE KIDS Not for funding MOMS lifestyle. Kathy... take note of what people have posted... the system stinks and needs to be changed... NOW!!!!!

Date: July 08, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Fantastic Article!!!! About time the truth was finally printed. There are so many Fathers rights websites now full of stories from Divorced Dads about high Support Payments, denied access etc etc, isn't it about time the system was changed. I pay support in Canada for my kids, I am struggling every month to make ends meet, but my ex enjoys Tens of thousands of dollars in the bank, a brand new car, numerous foreign holidays, smart clothes, health spas etc etc. I have just had to fork out another few hundred dollars (plus a few hundred more for when I get there) on airfares to Canada from the UK to see my kids. My ex refuses (says she can't afford it) to contribute to their airfares to visit me, despite the fact she (and the kids) spent last Christmas at some smart resort in Mexico which must have cost her.... its just not right.

Date: July 03, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I was appalled but not surprized to read the email regarding the information available on the internet regarding children- fetal alcohol syndrome, adoption abroad, child support. It's so true... how to get cheap labour, make a man pay for everything, etc, etc. When is the government going to wake up and put laws in place that encourage PERSONAL responsability? How about a few benefits for people who are married and raising children? Why don't they get a $7000 tax deduction at the end of the year for supporting their child? What is most appalling is that a woman can collect a substantial amount of tax free support from her ex, get child tax credits monthly and then claim the child as a tax deduction at the end of the year! The man pays for everything and she gets the deduction! Only overpaid, arrogant politians like the Minister of Justice- Ann McClellan think that this is fair. Even when reports have been made clearly outlining all the terrible inequities of the current system, she still turns a blind eye and claims that more research is needed before any changes will be even entertained. What about all the men who are now living in poverty because of the current system? Our government constantly rewards the lazy and takes from hardworking, ambitious people.

Date: July 01, 2001
Name: Maritta Meri

Comments:
Yes. Divorced fathers do get a dirty deal. Our entire political and judicial system is anti-father, anti family.

As an example of the skewed information that women are fed on daily basis: Health Canada's Website "Services for Children: Guide to Government of Canada Services for Children and their Families" has the following section:
"Preparing for Parenthood"

The page lists five guide documents:

1) "Parents with a child born or placed in their care for adoption on or after December 31, 2000, may be eligible for these increased benefits. In addition, the Government has reduced from 700 to 600 the number of hours of insured employment you need to qualify."

2) "Fetal Alcohol Syndrome"

3) "Under Canadian immigration law, you can adopt a foreign-born child inside or outside the country".

4) "The Live-in Caregiver Program brings workers to Canada on a temporary basis to care for children, seniors or persons with disabilities when there is no one in Canada to fill these positions."

5) "Child Support Guidelines."

In other words: Are you addicted to alcohol, but want a child? Not to worry, you can always adopt one from abroad. You can also get cheap immigrant labour to look after the child. As well as improved maternity benefits. And best of all, no need to keep the father, he has to pay support even if he only signed his name on the adoption papers or just was around long enough to become a sperm donor.

It's official: a child = a mealticket. And you don't even need to get pregnant to get it.

What else would a woman need to know? In the opinion of Health Canada, that covers it all.

Date: June 29, 2001
Name: Donna

Comments:
I have a co-worker who has been divorced for several years. He has always paid support for his four children by giving cheques directly to his ex-wife. The amount that he pays was determined on the salary that he earned in a year that was filled with overtime. The fact that his income has decreased drastically in the last few years has not come into play with the courts in determining the amount of payment to his ex each month. The fact that one of his children is of legal age, in the work force earning her own way, and NOT living with the ex-wife has also not come into play with the courts. He is still required to pay for four children. The fact that another child has graduated high school, moved in with Dad and is also in the work force will also not come into play until this issue is back before the courts.

The fact that the ex-wife contacted Maintenance Enforcement and told them that she had not been paid for several months ( a lie ) caused MEP to contact him with an arrears notice for quite a sum of money, threaten not to renew his drivers licence, etc. etc. He sent them photo copies of the cancelled cheques and agreed to send them post-dated cheques to send to his ex on his behalf from this point onwards. He sent MEP these cheques and a few days later received a notice that his wages would be garnished!! When he called MEP and questioned this, he was told that they would not be garnishing his wages. The next pay cheque proved that not only did the ex-wife receive the post-dated cheques from MEP, she also received the garnished wages that they had told him would not be happening, a double payment that left him with a total of $5.00 in his pocket.
Where is the fairness here?

The children prefer to be with their father, but thanks to the courts, are forced to live with a vendictive woman who uses them to line her own pockets. I have watched this fellow live on the poverty line while faithfully providing for his children. There are a lot of things in this country that need fixing, but none more important than the Maintenance Enforcement Act. The Federal Government has all sorts of information on every citizen in this country, surely MEP can access a computer and find out when a child has reached the age of 18 and entered into the work force to support themselves. The payor should not have to go before the courts to inform MEP that the amount of children entitled to support has decreased. We can sure tell that most politicians were lawyers!!!

My husband and I have been married for nearly 25 years, and I cannot imagine, even when I am really mad at him, treating him in the manner that most divorced women treat their ex-husbands.
This system is really sick and needs to be changed.

Date: June 28, 2001
Name: Charles Matson

Comments:
Yes divorced dads have been getting a raw deal
from the courts.If the mother does not work then
the court demands better than half the wages from
the father.Even when the children are old enough
(18) he is still held responsible for higher education.The judges seem to forget that marrage is a two way street,if the father is the cause of the breakup then he should be held accountable but
in too many cases the wife is the root cause of the divorce and the law turns a blind eye to the facts. If the wife leaves the marrage because of her infidelity her ex should not be blamed.

Date: June 27, 2001
Name:

Comments:
It is amazing the impact that the payer has to suffer in the process.Consideration should be given to the fact that a single man is allowed at least $520.00 to live on but yet in paying support some people are left with way below this to survive on.Wouldn't it be better then for the person to live on welfare.
The system needs to be looked at in greater detail and an analysis of the issues of the family should be lookedat.Michael's story was extremely touching. My brother found himself in a similar situation and I can analyse what he is going through. In the finale the family indeed suffers when factors beyond control affect the life styles of those involved.

Date: June 27, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I would first say that your work with divorced fathers is a breath of fresh air for us. from The day my wife dicided to leave me I thougth only of my children. I left instead,leaving her and the children secured in the family home. Within days of my departure I fell into depression that left in a state of stupor and unable to hold a job for more than two weeks time. Theis condition existed for more than 2 years during which time I surported my children when I could. Ofcourse, The court did not understand that and based child support payments on my potential earnings.
I am have caught up, but not without the experience of:incerased auto insurance due to MEP imposed licence restrictions/suspensions apartment evictions and ruined credit due to garnishee of my wages. MEP's files on me are chronically out dated by about 6 month and although I am in good standing ie satisfing my divorve court order They managed to garnishee my
energy rebate cheques and more recantly my tax return cheque. So why should I hold a job or even stay alive in this unjust world.
FJ

Date: June 27, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I think that very few fathers once divorced, care about seeing or paying for things for their children. There are a few that break every rule, but I've known thousands of children of divorce who's Dad's, like mine, paid little money or attention to them, leaving lasting scars. They may complain they are not living the high life, as my Dad does, but in reality, when you compare our family, where the child (myself) had to help Mom pay for our bills and to just eat to a man at the top of his salary range, missing a few hundred a month. My Dad complains about how much it hurts him to pay two hundred a month, and he's always got a new car, can afford to eat out at restaurants, etc. Well, I just don't buy it. He may have lost a little income but it is nothing compared to what we have lost. Men have no idea what it is to always have minimum paying jobs and to never make as much as the men in the next cubicle do. To be passed up for promotions because on the off chance you "might get pregnant." Try to support two kids with all the odds against you and then complain. I just don't buy it.

Date: June 26, 2001
Name: R

Comments:
I have already commented, but then I scrolled down some of the other comments and it made me angry. Women, this comment is for you. The money that your new boyfriend,husband etc pays, is not to his ex-wife,it is to pay the way of his child. Here are some stats for you,as you don't seem to understand what it really costs us. I get 600$ a month. he has to pay half of the day care cost, which is 500$ a week, and the rest is for child support. With that 350$ a month, I have to feed him, cloth him, have a roof over his head. My rent wich is cheap for my area, is 750$.The car that is required to get him to daycare, and myself to work is an old car. Maintenence isn't too bad, lets hope nothing breaks down on it.Insurance only costs me 100$ a month. My son is 5 now, and I have spent an average of 50$ a month in clothes as he is forever growing. I do not buy brand names, and take used clothing when I can get it. My son is extremely bright and enjoys going to the zoo, or museum occasionaly. He doesn't eat much, but to feed him a healthy,balanced meal does require that I have more than fish sticks in my freezer, and fresh vegetables and fruit do cost money. He enjoys "pokemon, and digemon" and although toys are reserved for birthdays and Christmas I like to pick up some small thing that will make him happy. When he gets a cold, he is prone to asthma, the medication that he has to have costs me 70$. His vitamins are not that expensive, nor are his childrens tylenol. . I work for all the little things that he wants. I make 23 g a year, while my ex makes 40 g. So my question is, when I pay all this, how do you figure that he is paying me? Send my son away to someone else to raise? Over my dead body. Children are not pets. He came from my body, and no one will raise him but me. With help I can raise him. I don't ask for allimony, and the child support that I receive doesn't pay for his half of the bills to raise a child. Please understand, MEN DO NOT PAY WOMEN, if they did we would charge a lot more!

Date: June 25, 2001
Name: Lisa Brown

Comments:
#1. I believe only in spousal support in cases where the woman has been a stay at home mom, and then only for a period of 1 year to give her time to get into the workforce. The man should not have to support the woman when he no longer lives with her.
#2. With regard to child support I feel all expenses should be equally paid by both parents. Not the father paying all and more, and not even getting the benefit of having the child live with him. The only people who gain are the lawyers and the recipient. Lawyer's fees alone can bring a man under. The system is not fair, and it's about time the justice system stop nailing the father's to the cross.

Date: June 24, 2001
Name: carla callegari

Comments:
The pendelum has swung way to far to the other side. I agree that many women received unfair, low support payments in the past but now support payments are ridiculously high! Many women are better off financially after a divorce than they were in the marriage. They get tremendous support payments, supplements from the government and increased tax deductions. For a society that claims to value marriage, the financial and taxation rewards of divorce for WOMEN are high! Who comes up with these laws and why does it take so long to have critical changes made? The current system encourages women to be dependent on their exs. Why go out and work if you can milk your ex for everything? Just use the words "in the best interest of the child" and a judge will give you everything you want. Men are viewed as a financial source- nothing more, nothing less... How sad is it that custody decisions are made based on GENDER not financial, and emotional capabilities? Why do the custodial parents get tax free support but claim their child as a spousal equivilent at tax time? They get the money free and then they can use it as a tax deduction at the end of the year. Am I the only person who has a hard time understanding this logic? The recent decision to allow women to go back to court for more spousal support AFTER they have already settled is a complete nightmare! Can anyone ever have a clean break and completely go their separate ways after a divorce??? If 2 adults come to an agreement after a divorce and sign a settlement, no one should ever be able to come back looking for more. In any situation other than divorce, a judge would throw them out of court! With these types of laws in place, no one will ever want to marry again for fear of it not working out and having a lifetime financial commitment to an ex. I personally feel that before marriage (or comman law) people should be made to have a prenuptial agreement that deals with all financial issues should a break-up occur. This way decisions would be made when 2 people are loving and reasonable, not vindictive and bitter. If you can't agree on issues before a marriage- you shouldn't get married. With the laws today, no financially independent man or woman should ever enter into a union without careful legal protection of their assets and future income. You never know what tomorrow may bring and I for one would not want to be at the MERCY of our current legal system!

Date: June 22, 2001
Name:

Comments:
The system is extremly unfair. In my instance I am being asked to support a higher standard of living than my own. I am being asked to alot funds to pay for a babysitter while I cannot aford to go have an eye examination. Worse yet is the loop holes that have been alotted to my ex, she has married into money (does not work) and as such will ask that I pay for all the expenses and when it comes down to calculating how the expense should be divided she throws up her hands and says 'I'm unemployed therefore I cannot finacially contribute in the expenses', but she writes the cheques and leaves me to worry about how to find the money.

Date: June 21, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I think the court system is the biggest problem, I was just ordered to pay $397. per month child support, and $1000.00 per month spousal support. I only clear $1990.00 per month. My X wife gets to live in our joint home which is paid for, and has a legal aid lawyer for free. I had to rent a place, and I pay my lawyer $200.00 per hour. I don't have a problem with the child support, and am paying it, but there is no way I can afford $1000.00 a month spousal support. If I paid this, I would have $200.00 per month to live on after paying my rent, without having paid any bills, groceries, fuel etc. The judges seem to think you can get the amount of taxes taken off your paychecks adjusted, so you will have lots of money, but in fact all you get extra on a check is $112.00 if you have a $1000.00 per month court ordered spousal support payment. This is still no where near enough to let me live in any kind of a way. As well I got all the joint debts to pay. Nothing like a judges ignorance, to force a person who yesterday owned there own home, drove new vehicles and lived well, into repossesions, deppression, and garnisheed wages.

Date: June 21, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Yes, I feel divorced dad's quite often get a raw deal. My brother was just served papers at work a couple of months ago. He didn't even suspect that there was such a problem with his marriage. He received papers on a Friday. The next Thursday he was already in court. The judge said that he won his separation case but lost the war. He ended up paying $400.00 a month in child support for a daughter who is not even his. He also has to pay $1000.00 a month in maintenance. He only clears $1900.00 a month. He was told to move out of the family home which was totally paid for because it is more convenient for him to move. He now has to pay $375.00 a month for rent on a basement suite. After he pays for his groceries, phone and gas for his beater of a truck,(they had to give the car back to the dealer because he could no longer make the payments)he has nothing left. There is also large credit card bills that need to be paid off, most of which was charged by his ex wife. His lawyer in court started to protest that there is no way he could live with payments like that but the judge told him to be quite or he would be charged with contempt of court. His wife does not work and she certainly does not have any insentive to start looking for a job now. He ended up with all of the debt and she ended up with no bills and gets to live in a totally paid for house. How fair is this system when it can totally ruin a person's life. He did not even instigate the separation, didn't even know that one was coming!

Date: June 20, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I have already posted my comments with respect to this article. All I can say is that my husband was the one who broke the family circle. Through mutual agreement, I stayed at home for 13 years raising our 3 children, while he pursued his career, which involved late nights and business trips. The deal was that once things "took off", that I would be able to pursue my dream of getting a College education, and then I would return to the workforce while he retired. Well, I returned to school alright - as a single parent. It was very very difficult, but I have just graduated - with honours! My sole source of income is support (spousal/child) from my ex husband. We are in the process of a divorce, which so far has cost me over $25K, much of which was borrowed. He withholds money to "teach me a lesson", has allowed the mortgage to go into arrears, has caused me and my children emotional and financial stress. I have every intention of securing a job now, but because my children are high needs (residual effect of the divorce), a qualified babysitter will run upwards of $10.00 an hour. There goes 2/3 of MY pay. The children and I are frequently having to struggle to make ends meet, and I have had to borrow money to buy basic necessities. Meanwhile, my ex has two cars, a house, and is out every single night. Forgive me if I don't have any sympathy for all these single fathers who supposedly have it rough. Try walking a day in my worn out shoes!

Date: June 19, 2001
Name:

Comments:
As much as I agree with most of your article, I think it to misses the real issue. Financial responsibilty is only a small aspect of parenting. Only in divorce procedings is money the primary factor of whether you are a great parent or a deadbeat. Look at the issue of families on Social Assistance. These children are not apprehended because of the lack of money the parents have. Parenting skills are not determined by the lack of money. Otherwise Social Service Ministeries all over Canada would be apprehending children of all families on social assistance because this people would be seen as deadbeat's, which is absolutely untrue.

Time and committment are the cornerstones to being a responsible and good parent. I can make monthly payments, ok but if I never see my children and or committ to a balanced loving relationship whereby we love each other have problems work them out and continue on. We miss the point of parenting, we are teachers, nuturers, advocates, nurse doctors, coaches etc. Not just a bank account.

The courts are so clear about money, which is valid however they get very grey about visitation. What is generous access? Who decides? Basically the fathers are told once the relationship is over that we are only a wallet/bank acocunt. We have no right to any info about our children and the decisions will be made by the sole custody parent, generally the women, 80%. However don't miss a payment you dead beat even if you can't see your child or have any access to information about them.

It is also ironic that our society today includes father in the parenting role by having change tables in all our public washrooms male and female, more dad's are stay at home, as was I for a number of years.
However in the court room we are told women raise children. Not men.

The United States has taken a more reasonable approach to divorce proceedings. They have Forced Mediation. The Judges, as I understand it, tell both parties to go to a mediator and bring the results back to the judge. If either party creates difficulties or is uncooperative the judge is made aware of this and can deal with it. The issues of the past relationship are less likely to get in the way.

My own story could be one you wrote about with the one exception, I chose to live. I was ordered from the family home by the courts, I had no job as I was the stay ay home parent, I also had no money. car or place to live. For 7 months I lived on friends couches and living room floors. During the 7 months it took 4 months to find a job, which was a part-time one for $7.00 per hour. My last employment was $50,000. a year.

The judge did not rule on financial responsiblites
so once I started to earn money again I went to the maintainance enforcement people and asked how much should I pay. I was told "be a man" decide for yourself, make a decision. I went to the law line a legal information phone service and was told basically the same. No one was prepared to assist me. However they were very clear that I should not misjudge my payments. With the amount I earned after making child support payments I did not have enough money to rent a room for myself.

I did give up like some of the men in your article however, my friend reminded me that killing my self would destroy my children and accomplish nothing else. So I spent all my energy focusing on what does it mean to be a good dad.

The real issue for the court's is they live the myth of dead beat dad's believing the horror stories and overlook the overwhelming reality that there are hundred's of committed responible men who are only to pleased to care for thier children.

Court's should be focusing on the individual in each case and with the assistance of an unbiased third party assessment define what's i struly in the best interest of the children. Providing the opportunity for the parents to spend a smuch time with the children as possible.

In response to the other article about the effect of divorce on children.

What is the damage done to children especially male children when they see women get the children.
They see father's who are often left penniless having no place to live and having no imput inot acess of thier children. If they can see thier kids they may have no money to spend on then. I believe the impact om male children with greately affect thier relationships forever. Why be a dad? If I get a divorce I will lose everything won't see my kids and will spend all the years broke unable to have a decent quality of life.

Thanks for listening I am very passionate about this issue and my emotions may have made my opinions unclear or garbled.

Date: June 18, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I am sad to hear of all the fathers that have been punished for getting married and having kids. I am outraged at women for using money to fill the void of love. I am a divorced women with no kids and am glad of that after reading the stories of men being put through the ringer. Do these women not see that the kids are the ones suffering in the end. NO AMOUNT OF MONEY CAN REPLACE DAD!!! I work in the construction business which is a man dominated industry, it is also 90% divorce rate. I hear the guys at work complain often about "THE EX" and the money they pay for the kids that they never see. I didn't realize that these men are complaining for a reason. When did it become the law that a man is 100% reasponsible for the kids? I thought that it was 50-50. Just because of a divorce he is held financially responsible. In todays society women work to, so why are the men having to pay so much? I know one man that pays $2700.00 a month for 2 kids, another $2000.00 a month for 3 kids yet they are still being harassed several times a day over the kids needing braces or a new bike. Where does it end? How are these guys supposed to start over? Why are these women not made to supply the EX with receipts as to were the money is going? I'm sure that most men would not have a problem giving money if they knew it was going to the kids and not her new boyfriends car. I think that this is the scam of the century, Women being paid well for having a child and pulling the pin on the marriage to gain a double income. I feel that as a women if you are going to leave your husband(under any circumstances) you should be prepared to get a job and provide 50% of the money to raise the kids. If you can't do that then give the kids to him. If you can't provide atleast 50% then you don't deserve the kids. And last but not least, I feel that the women that use the kids to hurt him are evil. In the end the kids suffer the most, if this is how much the men are being hurt what happeneds to the kids????

Date: June 18, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
MY ESTRANGED WIFE LEFT WITH A $100,OOO.00 LOTTERY WIN LEAVING ME DESTITUTE.I HAVE BEEN TRYING FOR NINE YEARS TO VARY THE ORIGINAL SUPPORT ORDER WITH VERY LITTLE SUCCESS.I HAVE LOST TWO JOBS AS A RESULT OF ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS.I AM LOSING MY SECOND FAMILY AND DON'T KNOW WHERE TO TURN FOR HELP!!!

Date: June 18, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
While I know several single mothers who have never received child support from their exhusbands (you can't get blood out of a stone), I know an equal number of men who are being bled dry by the system. These men are living at the poverty level, while their ex-wives have remarried and are living very very well. It just isn't right. I think our judicial system should take into account the total income of each family, not just the ex-wife's income. Divorce sucks, but there should be a more equal division of financial responsibility.

Date: June 16, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
The stories in this article are horrendous! Finally, a look at the other side of the coin. What I would like to share with you is a side of that coin that isn’t so much to the extreme, or seeing the worst of the worst. This story is only my experiences with the “divorce with children”.

We began with the separation, me moving out of the house – so as not to disturb the home environment of the 2yr old son. Offers were made for child support but she insisted that amount she wanted was 80% of my take-home pay. Locks on the house were changed and was being told that the bank was taking the house and any of my possessions were going with it. Bankruptcy now was in the works.

I found myself having frequent trips to the courthouse, sketchy visitation rights to my son. Negotiated through my lawyer – who was too busy to respond quickly enough before the access dates had passed. All that was required, was an accusation of some sort from my X and visitation was suspended for months until the courts could determine that what was accused was incorrect. There was no recourse for the false allegation, loss of access or incurring of expenses. The battle in the courts with her lasted for 5yrs (so far), $18,000.00 in lawyers fees and because of the lawyers impatience another bankruptcy (even though he was fully aware of my financial situation).

Today, I have annual T4 examinations (ordered by the government to comply) by her to see if she would like to take me back to court for more money. This of course is over and above the annual cost of living raise she gets even though I don’t receive these. In fact I take home approximately $150.00 more now than I did 10yrs ago. To add the icing to this scenario, any activities regardless of cost, that she decides to have him partake in, I am responsible for half in addition to my support payments.

Access is still in her hands. The insanity of this situation is that if I show up for access she can turn me away at the door and the only recourse is for me to take her to court in some distant future at some astronomical price for an access date long passed. On the other hand, if I am late returning him she can have the police department take immediate action.

Dads are the criminals in this failure of relationship (NOT). Their life’s course actually changes totally and is in the hands of the X when and if she chooses to by taking you to court for more money or for change in access. For the time being, while I’m not now in the process of circling the revolving court doors, I have this incredibly misplaced grateful feeling that she is leaving me alone.

LOVE IS GRAND!!
DIVORCE IS $50,000.00

Date: June 15, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I do believe that Dad's do get the raw end of the deal. I have a brother who is struggling. I am not going to spend to much time giving details. What I want to know is who do I contact to start resolving this situation? I once heard about a divorced father's support group but have not been able to find them. I want to do something. Not just whine and snivel.

Date: June 13, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Maybe some of the non-paying fathers have legitimate reasons for not making regular payments. Maybe most are making an attempt to fulfill their obligation. What makes it really bad are the fathers out there who make it their goal NOT to pay. The mentality behind this is believing they are supporting the custodial parent. I speak from experience. In the fall of 2000, my ex-husband had to appear in court because of arrears in excess of $3000. This was accumulated over a two year period. (The initial court order was for $150 monthly for my three daughters) When I read the minutes of the hearing, his lawyer made reference to the monies that 'I felt I was entitled to'. The court order was revoked and arrears, except $1500, were forgiven. When asked when I would receive this money, I was told I wouldn't because he was on Social Assistance and couldn't pay. Since the hearing, he has moved his new family to another province and has been working. Knowing this, and as upset as I get with him and the whole system, I still feel he should be able to have a comfortable life for himself and his new family. Because things didn't work out with our marriage, doesn't mean he's not entitled to a happy healthy life. For that, you need money!

Date: June 08, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Dead - thud - beat. That is me a used to be dad, had the family life ripped out of my chest, ventured onwards to a new life, in a new country and not nailed while out of the country. Returned home to threats and warrants, it didn't matter that the deal went sour and I lost everything I had except my self respect. No worry, the courts and the Family Maintenance Enforcement people took that. No hope, no recourse. I am forced to live as one who is put in the same class distinction as a pedifile. I was ordered to court, did not duck, showed up and two female prosecutors wanted to throw me in jail. I was all for it because hey, I'm broke, flat busted broke. They don't care. When one has nothing left to give they want to take your freedom. If this is freedom you can have it.

Pooh, pooh pitiful me? Not quite. I do not live off the system, yet the system makes me an outlaw. I'm tired, I'm hungry and one day I guess they will catch up to me. What then? Jail? No thanx, I really cannot imagine sitting next to Charles Manson & friends. I cannot imagine becoming a "friend" of 6 foot "bubba". I moved from this country to another that our sanitized sophisticated society calls backwards and ruthless. Upon my return to my home and native land, I found how backwards and ruthless ingnorance of life is. Canada? Canadians really don't know how to live anymore. If something ain't right in the eyes of someone except the "wasp" then you're dead. SO yes I am a dead dad, beat up, discarded and with no hope of ever escaping the catclaws of justice. SO dear friends what does one do?

Date: June 08, 2001
Name: Sylvia

Comments:
YES - men often get the raw deal in divorce. Why is that? So often you hear that the woman has re-married, yet still is able to continue receiving support from the ex-husband. Once she has gone on with her life and remarried, support should end. One situation going on right now in Ontario - the wife has a child through a previous marriage. That husband is still paying her support even though she was remarried years ago. The current husband and this woman have children of their own and have now split up. The courts award this woman support for all children of so much of the man's pay cheque that he cannot make ends meet himself. Of course, she gets to stay in his house too while he gets booted out.

Why is it that the woman always seems to dig for the cash / pensions / house, etc. and the judges allow this and more? The judges seem to make the man pay far more than 50/50. Yet - you rarely hear of the WOMAN paying the man support. It isn't like it used to be where the woman was strictly a housewife - no second or full-time job. Many women have financial support of their own yet still expect the man to pay through the nose.

NOT FAIR (and, yes, I am female). My comments are not biased by your article as some readers reply. I didn't even read your article.

Date: June 05, 2001
Name: Kathy

Comments:
I sent a submission in on may 31st. People have sent in their replies. I am not surprized to see that some women say they are struggling to makes ends meet. That so many children live in poverty. I am a female mom IF YOU CANT AFFORD THE CHILDREN THEN GIVE THEM TO THE DADS!! You still see them the same amount of time. Most Dad's have the kids just as much as the moms anyways. NO SUPPORT EXCHANGE JUST LET THE DADS RAISE THEM!!! Women do not want this because then the can't support themselves.I say that it will take care of the welfare problem as well in Canada. I do have my son from a previous relationship Oh but I support him not his dad and his dad makes lots and lots of money. That is not my right to take his hard earned money. He has started a new family why should I get the right to destroy that. Come on somebody please I am so willing to stand up for all of the men who get ripped off. Why can't the government see the totally mistreated men.

Date: June 04, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Yes I think that fathers are treated unfairly. I live with a man who has custody of one of his sons, the wife is not obligated to pay him support. I am the one helping him support their son.
I find it interesting that the "guidelines" suggest that each party should become financially independant after a period of time.....and yet it is those very guidelines that encourage the dependency of the spouse receiving support. By providing a seemingly endless supply of spousal welfare there is no inspiration for amelioration. It is ironic that the government has instituted a workfare project and yet the courts seem hesitant to impute an income on a woman, and in fact discourages them from getting on with their lives and continues to bind each party to an
ineffectual, perished relationship.

Date: June 04, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I made a very tough decision to leave my wife over a year ago because I could no longer tolerate my situation. We had been married a few years and our relationship had steadily gone down hill. Do I put 100% of the blame on her? NO. I should have left her the day she refused to go back to work full time. The financial pressures were overwhelming, we did not agree on the very basics of how to raise our daughter, and she spent most nights every week at her mothers home since our daughter was born because she didn't like staying alone nights that I worked. (This never bothered her before we had a child)I felt abandond, I was working tons of overtime to pay the bills we had, and we still couldn't make ends meet. She refused to put our home for sale so we could down size and move closer to her mother. SHE WANTED IT ALL!!! Finally, I had enough and left her. Unfortunately this decision has cost me everything. I love my daughter and want to support her financially and emotionally but the courts only see me as a paycheck. My ex gets to stay in the house ( she still only resides there a few nights a week) while I continue to pay the mortgage! She also gets money for our daughter. I couldn't afford all the bills when we were together and now I need a roof over my head too. Does this make sense to anyone? A JUDGE THINKS IT DOES! Men beware, if you support a woman for even 6 months and you break up, you will have a potential life time obligation. Women do not seem to be held accountable to financially provide for their children. She has worked part time since our daughter was born and I have worked 60-70 hours per week! If this wasn't bad enough, I only see my daughter 6 times a month. How is this in the best interest of my daughter? The current family law system is very gender biased and needs to be changed.

Date: June 03, 2001
Name:

Comments:
My estranged wife left me upon meeting someone at a drunken house party.
She has thus far been able to extort more than $15,000.00 from me with help from an unscrupulous lawyer and judge.
In April I was ambushed by a surprise court hearing wherein the "judge" refused to allow me to obtain legal representation. Is there any quicker way to bring the administration of justice into disrepute? Carla Homolka was allowed a lawyer. Wives who kill their supposedly abusive husbands are allowed lawyers. What is so persuasive about an adulterous wife that basic Canadian legal rights can be set aside by a family court? I could go on at length but most everything has been said in this forum that could be said about the travesty of feminism and the Canadian family court.
A quick thank you to Readers Digest for allowing me to see that all Canadian males are subjected to the same institutionalized abuse. Too bad other magazines don't have the courage to research this issue. It gives me added incentive to carry this battle when knowing it may help others who are perhaps less able to fend for themselves.

Date: June 03, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I am a noncustodial parent in the United States. As a Mom, I have been attempting to see more of my 12 year old daughter for years. Yes, laws in the United States and Canada are unfair as far as child custody and child support to whichever parent does not have custody. These antiquated laws have to be changed. I am currently on temporary disability and cannot get my child support payments stopped. Totally unfair.

Date: June 03, 2001
Name: carla

Comments:
Yes they get a raw deal! I am amazed at all the money women get if there are children involved. Child support should be paid in a percentage of gross dollars. (10% per child to a maximum of 30% total) The ex should be responsible for paying taxes on this amount. After all... she will get to claim the child as her spousal equivilent at tax time and collect a child tax credit each month! I agree that men must be responsible financially for any children but so should the women. Why is it that they seem to collect from every source available? If the phrase "in the best interest of the child" is used to get more assets and support than perhaps the law should start awarding custody to the person with the biggest paycheck. The law is blantantly biased against men in every area of child suport and custody. It is my sincere hope that a men's group files a class action suit against our government before it is too late! Men are viwed as nothing more than sources of income to their children. What adds insult to injury is when the woman also gets free legal council because her income is so low but yet the man is forced to incur huge legal bills to defend himself even though his take home income is less than hers after she receives child support and section 7 add on expenses. There is no motivation for the woman to settle when legal battles cost her nothing but financially drain him. This actually a source of sick pleasure for some women. It is time that our government took a closer look at the current system and stopped listening to the wining immature "feminists" that feel the world owes them a living!

Date: June 01, 2001
Name: D. Holterman

Comments:
I wrote a comment here on May 30th. I have come back to this page and I am floored by what some people are going through here. I was just thinking that if the courts are not helping these parents that are being taken to the cleaners by their ex's then maybe all you people should get together and go to the media with this. The media might get someone important to listen. I find it disgraceful how many fathers are living in poverty while their ex is living the highlife with their money. You money hungry mother's and some fathers should be ashamed and punished.

Date: June 01, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Yes, I do think divorced fathers do get the raw deal especially when it comes to support VS joint custody. A father has to pay child support when the mother refuses to keep the court order provisions on visitation. What happens? She goes to FMEP and he just gives up seeing his child because too often the men are told to take it back to court and they usually cannot afford to go to court and most of the time they have made too much money for legal aid. There should be a program for men like FMEP where the visitation is enforced. My husband and I went through this ordeal a few years ago and we can't afford a lawyer therefore we haven't seen his son from a previous marriage ever since our son was born 2 years ago. Women want equal rights only when it suits them and they often take advantage of the lop sided judicial system! Its time to make changes for the children!

Date: May 31, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Hi I became a single father atfer it was proven that she was not capable of caring for our 2 children. This was very hard as I work full time and shift work to boot but I was very willing to take on the task of raising the children on my own. You hear how there are dead beat dads and how if they are not paying child support within a month they are being chased down, well let me tell you she has yet to pay any support for the children and yet nobody has knocked on her door loking for it, I have asked but to no avail. And while I am at it how about the fact that when women get custody they are automaticly entitled to at least half of or if not all the household belongings, you would think that it would be the same if the father has the children. Well let me tell you this is not true, She walked out with almost every peice of funiture that I owned, the children were horrified by this, they were scared she would take their stuff to. So I have heard more then enough about it is always the mans fault and never the woman's and that the woman should always get custody. This is not true at all as I am proof that women will abuse their children, but that it is alright cause all she got was a slap on the wrist and ohh you can see your children next week......What if that was a man he would be in jail and never see his kids.....So don't talk deadbeat dads to me cause I have a deadbeat mom that has a boyfreind whom makes more money per year then I could hope to make.

Date: May 31, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
In your article I got the feeling that the author used three or four examples of extreme cases. I am in the process of trying to get child support for my son and it has taken me two years to get in front of a judge. I am so angry that someone would assume that men get the short end of the stick in divorce; there are situations when men do get the short end of the stick and all you hear about is how the woman took all his money and got the house. But most women I know are the ones who struggle day to day to make sure their children have food, shelter, clothing, and if they are lucky be able to give their kids a treat once a month. My husband left me high and dry and got the house and the friends; meanshile, my son and I were left to survive on what government assistance allowed;spending months with only enough food to feed my son, while I ate what he left on his plate. There have been studies done on single mothers and their diets and you know what in most cases the children maintain an okay diet,but the women are left with food insecurities, stress, fear, and not knowing if they will have enough to eat for the month. I think your author needs to do a little more research before publishing an article with such a narrow scope. The problem with divorce is that in most cases everyone thinks they got the short end of the stick; the only ones who get the short end are the children. What about spouses with mental disabilities who are kicked out with no coping skills unable to understand or realize what has happened? They are left to fend for themselves and usually end up out on the street and losing their children. What about those people? Just because Donna Laframboise writes for the "National Post" does not make her very knowledgable about divorce dads; maybe she should do a lot more real research before publishing articles that lack depth and only scratch the surface of a problem that our children have to deal with on a daily basis. These children who don't get the support they deserve and are the ones who end up feeling like they are not important and they must not matter. We have alot of child poverty in our country due to "Dead Beat Parents".

Date: May 31, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I totally agree with this article. Oh and I'm female. I feel so sorry for most men,In my opinion I agree men and women are responsible for the children. So, if the children need to be looked after than let the higher income person have the children and the other get visitation that way the children are still being looked after financially. That is the issue. Why Why should a man have to pay all his money to the ex!!I think that the issue should be raised with the government. What fairness is in Woman being able to take the ex to court every year!! For more I might add. Should'nt the father be allowed to get ahead at all. Something has to be done about this. If the issue is the financal responsibility.Then let the men have the children. I have children and if I can't afford them than why should I get my ex's money that's my responsibility. Let's STOP this! When is enough enough. If you can't support them give them to the one that can.

Date: May 31, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Yes i do agree fathers get the shaft..BIG TIME!!
My boyfriend has been seperated for over 5yrs and we have been together a little over 4 1/2 and it has been nothing but a struggle. We pay well over half my spouses income in child support and barely eek by from payday to payday...yet she is living in a beautiful home driving a brand new vehicle and our 88 car is on the brink of dying. My boyfriend needs to go in for surgery but that would drop his income by a great deal so if he does go in he will go into arrears with family maintenance because he cant make full payments...never mind maybe dropping the payments temporarily...NO..you just cant have the operation..we cant afford a lawyer and this was all done in supreme court so we dont have a hope in HE**. My point is why are the fathers the only ones that are responsible for the financial up bringing of the children. We have no problem paying support..its your responsibility as a parent.. but come on fair is fair..its a 2 way street here..she is just as much a parent in this as he is,,,and he cant even see them much cause they live out of province..and we cant afford to go there and if and when they come here we cant afford to do much with them cause we are still paying her while they are here..and like i said we barely make it from one payday to the next. I just think its time they looked at this system a little harder and with both eyes open and to both sides of the coin cause sometimes you not getting the true picture. So to all you men out there thinking about getting married and having kids BEWARE of the nasty women and if you are already married with kids think twice before you decide to leave or something and whatever you do never take their word for anything get it on paper or it will slap you in the face later. P.S. i am a women and a mother and i think that the government has given the women way too much power
Its time for equal rights to kick in again and make these greedy women financially responsible also.

Date: May 30, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I feel in most cases non-custodial parents do get a bad deal. I my self do pay child support and I really have no problem with it. It is wrong that I have no say in anything in regards to my daughter's life. I am made to look like I did something wrong.

My daughter's mother is now re-married and just had another baby. Two months after she had the baby she wants to take me back to court to get more money. Her and her husband have a good living but my everyday life is a struggle. I make a great income and it has even gone up since I have been seperated some years ago, it has gone up over $25,000.00 and I still only see less than 50%.

I could go on and on about this but I won't. I just would like to say that their are parents out there that really do need the support but in my case I am treated like a second class person that has no rights to anything.

I feel the system really needs to be changed so some people don't have to suffer and struggle day in and day out. I have writen the Government on how I feel about this and I am also looking into filing a law suit against them for discrimination. I live over 5 hours away from my daughter and have not seen her in over 4 months. According to my order I am too see her every second weekend and have her for a few weeks over the summer but that has not happened since she has moved 5 years ago.

I wish I could do something about this issue but no matter how hard I try I am still only one person, I realize that I really can't do mush about it since I am looked at as a lower type human already thanks to our system.

Thank You and if you would like to contact me feel free to do so. I would be willing to take a leave from work to fight this if I only knew that I would have some help. I happen to be the type of person to get things done.

Date: May 30, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Yes, I do think SOME fathers get a raw deal when it comes to paying child support after a divorce. My boyfriend loves his boys dearly and has no problem paying for their upkeep. Afterall, they are HIS kids too. What he and I don't understand is why he has to pay allimony too. His ex is working at a good job so why should he have to pay allimony to her. He pays over 1000.00 a month to his ex for their boys. He was layed off from his job last summer and couldn't find employment right away so he went on UIC till he found a new job. While he was on UIC his ex has his cheques garnished for the full 100%. How is HE supposed to live on $0.00 a month????? He was very willing to send anything he could to help her out, but she being the money hungry greedy thing wanted it all and to see him suffer. SHE left him by the way because she met someone on the net. He is and always has been a very loving father to his boys. They are his life. Women should NOT be allowed to take these men to the cleaners as lots do. I am a woman myself and I would NEVER take my ex to the cleaners. Those women who take their ex's to the cleaners should be ashamed of themselves. Thanks for letting me vent.

Date: May 29, 2001
Name: name withheld

Comments:
I pay 50% of my income to my "mistake"! I had a really bad lawyer who found himself more involved in Municipal politics than his practice! What makes it really hard to accept is the fact that her life has improved drastically by having her little affair!! Yes, I have considered leaving my job and watching her and her boyfriend sweat over paying for the new house and SUV!! Something has to be done. When will she pay the piper? Deadbeat Dad or Poor Father?

Date: May 29, 2001
Name: Peggy Vassair

Comments:
Yes, yes, and YES! Dads are treated unfair. The whole system needs to be looked into. Who says that just because the mother has the child that she is always the best person the raise him/her. You can have "dead beat" mom's also. Let's take a very serious look that this and condiser the child FIRST!

Date: May 29, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I am 23 years old, my parents got divorced when I was 10 and a 1/2. For me, I would have to say a lasting effect on me is the constant fear of abandonment and feeling worthless. I can not feel happy and feel like I will be with a person (relationhip) for a long time, because there is a contant fear that she will leave me like my parents.

Date: May 28, 2001
Name: Anita Hervieux

Comments:
Yes, there are deadbeat husbands & wives, but a wife who leaves her husband with five children to go and live with her lover shouldn't get any money whatsoever in my opinion. Personally a father who loves his children enough to be willing to take the responsibility of raising and caring for them should be commended, not harassed. The mother's background should be investigated, also her mental capacity. Did she help financially? More facters should be required to be able to make a fair decision. Forget men bashing and look at facts

Date: May 28, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
What a WONDERFUL, heart-felt, amazing article! On behalf of my boyfriend, I send the following that he recently wrote:

"In defence of deadbeat dads":

The premise of the definition of a DEADBEAT is based on some antiquated judicial assumptions in the majority of Divorce / Separation cases:

1) that women are better parents than men
2) that women are more equal than men after marrying
3) that women should be overtly compensated for raising the family and that the father's role is of little or no consequence
4) that since the man usually makes more money than the woman, the man should be expected to be the Payor and the woman the recipient.
5) That custody of the children should be given to the wife, not for her financial capabilities but because, well, she’s the MOM !
6) That, if, at the time, the DAD makes good money he should continue to do same regardless of what happens the next day, next month, next year.
7) THAT THE COURTS ARE EQUALLY ACCESSIBLE TO ALL, hence there is no excuse for becoming a DEADBEAT.
8) That the Payor is lying about and hiding vast amounts of cash, stocks, bonds, real estate… regardless of what he has presented as factual in his own defense and further that the Payee has none and is truthful to a fault. . .

Date: May 28, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I think you looked at only a few specific cases in your article on child support. Even though you found that most fathers pay you didn't note that those who are paying are giving the bare minimum and that there are a lot of children living at or below the poverty line while their fathers are not.

Date: May 27, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Some mothers are well looked after, maybe depends on the responsibilities the father is willing to accept. I got left with almost nothing and had 2 teens. A friend of mine, children all grown, got $800.00 a month and 50% of everything. The law doesn't really seem to help too much unless you're willing to spend big bucks on a lawyer.

Date: May 27, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I think that most fathers are good fathers. In my case, even though I work, I find it hard to pay my support. I have bills also. I find it very disturbing that my ex can sit on welfare for the last 4.5 yrs and not even make an attempt to get a job or go to school and try to make things better for herself and the kids even though her health is fine. The problem is that the welfare people do not follow up to make sure people are actively looking for work. Most people work overtime to get ahead. When a divorced father works overtime, he gets hit with higher support payments. If he has to go to court to get his payments adjusted, it costs around $300/hour. So much for getting ahead. Also the fact that you never know when you are going to get overtime makes it even harder. Your payments may be adjusted by the courts reflecting, say, that you get 10 hours a week OT. But what if you don't? You still pay. This is not fair. But there may be something we can do if we have strength in numbers. We have to lobby the Federal and Provincial Goverments to drop having to pay support on overtime hours. I may work 20 hours one month and 0 the next. So I pay the higher rate even though I can't afford it.

Date: May 26, 2001
Name: Knight

Comments:
How can anyone who earns 50+ thousand a year whine about paying $20 a month for 2 kids. Pathetic. They know their responsibilties and they still seem to be allowed to flaunt the fact that they are getting away with almost murder.
Mothers of the children are expected to cover all costs while the children's fathers are living the high life.
Second wives come into the picture knowing and should not expect that they are the only one now. Lets remember the children. That's who it is about. Not the adults--they can look after themselves.
Let's make the deadbeats pay.

Date: May 26, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
My lawyer told me I had a one in ten chance to win, guilty or not. This legal system is meant to put divorced fathers on welfare, alone

Date: May 26, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I think the law should be changed. Women are not all angels and many spend the child-support money on themselves or just frivolously, then come back for more and more!
Men are humans too and many times the better one of the parent but he is victomized by the ex-spouse and the law. As the system stands now, the father has to slave to support his family while the woman takes lengthy vacations and pay someone to look after the children without asking the father if he would like to have the children stay with him. He must just shut up and pay up!!!!

Date: May 25, 2001
Name: Kevin Lattimore

Comments:
If I was to add anything else to my previous observations, I would have to close off by saying that the major step that seems to lead to separation and divorce is the idealogy or the phrase that the children, human beings with growing rights and freedoms, belong to one parent or the other, or even to a sole person. As in "my child and my children." Second, the major way to get custody is to take the child with you or stay with the child, as a step to custody the idealogy or phrase is "possession is nine-tenths of the law."

Date: May 25, 2001
Name: Kevin

Comments:
As a male going through these various issues, the common factor is that if you are not a lawyer, you don't stand a chance. From one excuse to another, it is apparent that in Canada. As a man with a child or children, first you are denounced as a guardian, denied the opportunity of justice unless you are willing to pay a $10,000 - $15,000 retainer to initiate the fight for your child's rights. Plus, don't forget your overwhelming child support payment and spousal support obligations. So that in the end, yes sir, you are bankrupt, in debt, homeless or confined to a rooming house, or even relying on the kindness of friends. But it gets better: allegations of assault. The universal declaration of human rights, and more importantly Article 12, the declaration of children's rights, is supposed to be enough to protect the best of men. You would think that in Canada we could get things right. But when you have a legal system that says "when a client comes to you, charge all you can get," you don't have to be fair. To close off and it won't be the last thing I say. I say that the Canadian government sponsors child abuse, its' efforts to protect our children has failed, since the beginning of the country abuses have been committed, against children and still continues today. In 20 - 25 years as is normal, the Canadian will review our time in history and note its inactivity and will apologize and pay renumeration to those who can prove they where a victim of abuse when they were a child. Nobody guaranteed a perfect world, but some of these issues can easily be resolved. The faith and well being of our children rests in the hands of a government not knowing where it is going, or what it should really be doing.

Date: May 25, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Fathers are definitely getting the raw end of the deal. The May 1, 1997, guidelines are not reasonable. As parents, my husband and I spend approximately 20% of our NET income on our two children. The guidelines base payments on GROSS income. Nobody lives off of their gross income, they live off what is available - which is the NET income.

There also needs to be a reasonable cut off age. When parents are married, it is their choice whether they will contiue to support their children through University or College. Under the new guidelines, it is usually forced. This is unfair.

The government recognizes a person as an adult at the age of 18, yet the Divorce Act will have 24-year-olds as children under their definitions.

Until my husband's ex-wife went after him for support under the new guidelines in 1998, we had no problem paying support. The charted amount is only 17% of his GROSS pay for two children. That amount works out to 27% of his take-home pay. It really hurts. We don't spend that much on our own children.

I believe a reasonable amount of support for two children would be 17% of the father's NET pay.

As support payments continue to rise, we watch our standard of living fall. I don't disagree that fathers should pay support, but I don't agree with the charted amounts. The rules may have been put into place to protect the children of broken marriages, but who is looking out for the welfare of my children?

Date: May 24, 2001
Name: Charles Moore

Comments:
I am currently paying support of approximately $600 a month for one child. I am now in arrears in the amount of $13,000, over the course of the last 14 years. $11,000 of arrears was accumulated in the first 2 years due to a dispute in lack of visitation access to my son. I have just recieved a notice from the family responsibility office, indicating that I must set up a payment schedule to pay this off or pay it in full. If they do not agree with my schedule, they can and will enforce payment through my employer, seizure of property and other means and methods available to them. I am not in a position to pay off this substantial amount of money and a payment schedule that I propose will more than likely be refused. I am at a loss as to what to do and would appreciate any and all comments to assist me in this matter.

Date: May 24, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
While I agree that the situations in your article may be accurate to a certain degree, I happen to be one of the mother's for whom "the system" has failed miserably. My children are now half grown, and though there has been a court order in effect from the beginning of our separation, my husband has yet to pay one cent in support. When served with the original court documents for custody and support, he assumed if he ignored them they would go away. They might as well have. Over the years I have notified the appropriate departments of his home and work addresses. To no avail. When asked what they were doing to justify this problem, I could get no answers because his rights are protected. This is ridiculous. I have had to turn to social assistance on occasion to make ends meet and this, too, infuriates me because I do hold down a full-time job, but with childcare expenses as well as the general cost of bringing up 2 children, there just never seems to be enough. Meanwhile, he sits pretty, not having paid one cent in 8 years.
Tell me again the fathers are the ones getting the raw deal here!

Date: May 24, 2001
Name: name withheld

Comments:
After 14 years of divorce my ex-wife decided to go after me for more money and college money for our daughter. I was willing to send money to my daughter for her college fund and other money she needed. That wasn't good enough for my ex because she would not get any of the money. After the court case, having a female judge, I lost and have to send child support and college fund cheques to my ex, and my daughter has to collect from her mother. I don't think this is right. Would like some words of help to fight for my rights in this matter. A little more info: my daughter will be 19 this June and I still have to send my ex the money, I don't think that is right, am I wrong in thinking this?

Date: May 23, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I do think men should pay for their children, but I don't think they should be taken to the cleaner's. I also think that if a man pays for a child he should have rights to that child, which doesn't always happen.
My boyfriend has a son with a woman he lived with for a couple years. He feels that his ex is a better parent than he could be, and I have never heard him bad-mouth her in front of or around his son. She also has a daughter from another man, who doesn't pay support or have anything to do with the child. The daughter thinks that my boyfriend is her father, and he treats her as his own.
While he was going to school, he had to pay child support of $300.00 a month, while he was on a student loan. He had moved back in with his parents to try and make ends meet, working nights at a 7-11. After graduation he was making minimum wage and trying to keep up with the payments. He had payed what he could while in school but not always the court-ordered amount. So within 2 years, he fell behind. He would look for a better job, but needed a car to get one. The government would not let him drive or register a vehical, so he never got the job.
Finally we went to a lawyer and after two years, the money was settled. But he still has no rights to his child. That's a whole other case, they told us. More money to the lawyers and court costs, on top of the child support. I see now why people are doing extreme things when they see no end in sight. The only person who gets hurt through the whole thing is the child at stake, and the real father always gets the bum rap. I wish the government would take more time to check out the situations of the people they deal with and try to find a solution on middle ground where both parents and the children can cooperate with each other and the system.

Date: May 22, 2001
Name: name withheld

Comments:
Yes, I do believe these men are getting a raw deal. I know because I am going through it right now. In the past the women were the ones who got the raw deal and instead of reaching a fair compromise they went 100% completely opposite direction.

As a divorced father, we basically lose all rights to our children. Access is nothing but a joke. They limit your access to your kids. We have no say in how they're being raised. Our ex-wives have final say over everything. I'm not sure about anyone else's ex-wives, but my ex-wife just disagrees with everything I say and does whatever she wants to. Both parents should have liberal access to see their children, unless there are circumstances where there has been abuse and there are cases of that. I do understand that, but if there is no proof of abuse of any kind, then both parents should have liberal access to see their children no matter who is the primary care giver. Just because the parents don't get along any more and cannot live with each other does not mean the children should have to pay for it.

As for the financial part of a divorce, the courts are awarding these women insane amounts of money. I was told that you have to keep your ex-wife in a style that she is accustomed to. The courts do not seem to care about these men having a lifestyle or a life at all for that matter. They do not seem to care if we can afford to live on what is left to us. We end up going bankrupt and losing everything for which we have worked all our lives. I do not think that someone should have to go bankrupt just because they are getting divorced. In my case, my ex-wife receives half my net pay. I have had to sell some of my things so I could keep the house and I am still on the verge of having to declare bankruptcy. On top of all this I am going to pay a huge legal bill. They are stressing men to their limits and then pushing them beyond the point of no return with the laws as they are now. You are going to see a lot more of these men going bankrupt, committing suicide and some even going as far as committing murder. The tragic part of all this is, now some of these children are growing up without the benefit of both parents. Some parents do not seem to realize that all they are doing is hurting the children by dragging everything through the courts.

That is the problem that these courts are creating. Try and take something back into court to have it straightened out: The judges are not fair at all. They do not read all the information given to them. They just read what they want to. Mostly it seems whatever the women say is what they go by. Maybe if they held these judges accountable for their decisions they would make more informed decisions.

Yes I do believe these men are getting a raw deal. The way the system is right now it definitely creates deadbeat dads. Parliament should change the system before it costs more people their lives needlessly. The sad part is it's reversible, if we care enough to reevaluate the situation so all parties benefit.

Date: May 22, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
That divorced men are treated abominably by our judicial system is beyond doubt. Part of this is from the incompentence and/or prejuduce of the judiciary, and part the result of the feminist driven agenda in this area of law.
However, the more fundamental reason for men being treated the way they are comes from the all pervasive Marxist ethos that pollutes our country, wherein it is generally looked upon as a good thing for the State to confiscate wealth from one segment of society and give it away to another. This may take the form of guaranteed income supplements or old age security. We as a society still, mistakenly, look upon such actions by the State as being good. In the context of divorce, men are still looked upon as being part of the haves, and their families the have nots. Hence the State will do all it can to transfer as much income from the former to the latter.
Until we as a society begin to question this basic premise that underlies just about all of social policy in Canada, the chances of changing the situation of divorced men is remote.

Date: May 22, 2001
Name: Alfred Borg

Comments:
For sure some of fathers are taking a beating not only financially but also with custody of the children. Some wives are taking advantage of the law and are making their exes miserable. They even use the children to get back at there exes. The law should be looked into and make it fair for the fathers, mothers and the children.

Date: May 22, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
When my wife and I split up, I was destitute and bankrupt. I agreed to turn over possession of the matrimonial home and all of it's contents and in return, she was to waive child support payments until I could complete university and become gainfully employed again (I had lost my job and spent all of my savings providing for her, our child and her two children from a previous marriage). A dollar value was agreed upon which took into account my high student debt load. I am now employed and making headway against my loans, but I have just been informed that I am being taken back to court for more support ( I have paid the agreed upon amount every month without fail for two years now). When my lawyer informed me of how much my ex was asking for, I nearly laughed. I approached her and tried to negotiate a fair settlement and she told me that "I'd just have to go bad on my student loans, everyone does!".
I am waiting to hear from my lawyer as I write this as today is the day of the hearing. I have no doubt that I will be making some very substantial lifestyle changes after today because I don't believe for one moment that the courts will come to a fair decision. The amount of letters you have received from other fathers with their own horror stories, does nothing to raise my hopes.
Raw deal? You bet!

Date: May 22, 2001
Name: Gerald Berard

Comments:
Before Feb 1997 I had a beautiful wife, 2 beautiful children, a nice home, a dog and 3 cats. That fateful day Feb. 9, 1997 would change our lives forever. We and my mother-in-law were in a head-on collision on the highway. For the most part we all recovered from our injuries, but the emotional trauma that we all suffered was more than I or my wife could deal with. Things quickly fell apart. A little more than a year later I moved out. I immediatly started child-support payments and for the most part my ex and I were able to work out details. The only problem is that my quality of life sucks. I had it all and now I'm 37 and have nothing. I can't get ahead financially. I work as a full-time postal worker and a part-time paramedic and am on call as a firefighter. I do lots for my community but sometimes I feel like throwing the towel in. I work hard and get nowhere. The real problem is Bill C-41. Because of the $7,200 I pay every year, the extra tax I pay kills me. That is income in her home not mine. We are 2 separate entities now and the tax system should and must be changed. I survive from check to check and that's all I do is survive. It sickens me to think that the goverment is using fathers like myself to earn an extra billion over 5 years. IAs a hard working taxpayer, I am wondering why bother? I'm living off of nothing now, so why work??
If there is a group that is working towards changing Bill C-41, please contact me. We need to stand together and fight this inequity!

Date: May 22, 2001
Name: name withheld

Comments:
I found this article very interesting. It's good to see that someone has shed light on the sterotyped "dead beat father" Yes I do agree that some are deadbeats, but not all. I read the comments that other people submitted. I also feel that the system has failed me. It needs change, there's no doubt in my mind at all.

When I returned home after a long course I found the house empty. The court gave her everything that we had and awarded her custody of the children. So yes I'm very bitter. It took me 7 years to get my divorce and the only access I have to my two kids is e-mail and snail mail, which goes against the court order. How do I know my kids are getting the support from my payments or am i just supporting her drug and alchol abuse! I think the system is very corrupt indeed!
How often do you hear that the husband gets the kids? It happens but is very rare as far as I know.

Date: May 21, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Having had no contact with the legal system prior to my son's separation, I naively expected that it would be fair, balanced and honest --- WRONG! I have never been so incensed. My former daughter-in-law made the most ridiculous statements in her documents, several that could easily be proven false. The judge obviously did not read all (if any) of the documentation. As a result, he has placed our 20- month-old granddaughter within reach of an uncle who is a convicted pedophile! This judge was arrogant, rude and contemptuous of every father who came before him the day we were in court: One support order he made that day was nearly double the man's annual income. What is so frustrating is that in this democratic country that judge is accountable to no one. It has been horrible having to return our grandaughter to her mother when EVERY time for the past 4 years she begs to stay with Daddy. We feel that we are betraying her and are helpless to do anything about it until she is old enough for the courts to take her seriously. We need to support our sons who are being victimized by this so-called justice. We need to lobby Members of Parliament. We need to save our grandchildren. We need to break this cycle - the judicial system must become accountable to the people it is supposed to serve. No one should be above the law, especially those who are paid extremely well to carry out the law.

Date: May 21, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
What will it take to change these laws? I believe that every child of a divorce should have the right to grow up in the same environment as a child without a divorce. I consider myself lucky after having read some of the other submissions, but I still feel the system is unfair and biased against the noncustodial parent. In 1989 I received custody of my three children. I was offered custody under the provision that I not pursue any further actions, i.e. support. As a father who never expected this, I eagerly accepted. At the time, my kids were twins, 5, and a daughter, 3. With the help of my girlfriend, we raised these kids with no other support. Over the next six years we raised them, enduring lifes ups and downs, some years with very little income. But we still managed. At the age 9 my daughter decided she wanted to go and live with her mom. At the tim,e it was agreed that because I retained custody of my two sons I didn't need to pay her support. Three years later, while my ex was recieving a subsidy from mothers allowance while working full time, she was informed by the government that she must take me to court to get support because of the new guidelines, or she would be cut off. To make a long story short, because my income is more than double hers now, an income which did not get to this point until 1997, I have to pay support. My issue is not that I have to pay support, but the fact that during all of this I tried to express the fact that I raised these kids for six years and was continuing to support two of the three, but the court would not recognize this. The system makes everyone a deadbeat.

Date: May 21, 2001
Name: Alfred Watson

Comments:
The governnment could save a lot of money by firing all family court judges and staff. All they do is take 60% of the fathers financial worth( current and future) and give it to the woman regardless of the circumstances. An abacus could replace the court staff
Thank you Readers Digest for this terrific service. Please try to make these submissions required reading for all school aged Canadian males

Date: May 21, 2001
Name: name withheld

Comments:
Hi, I'm a deadbeat dad--even when my payments are met. I make regular payments of $150 to $250 depending on my salary, and when my ex gets the money, the first place she goes is the bars. My kids have a poor education, are always in trouble at school, and my hands are tied behind my back. I recently gained custody of my boy, but I still have support payments in the same amount. And now she also gets all tax monies due me (my GST and my family allowance, which is for my boy). Where is the justice system for men's rights. Recently I was on E.I. and family maintenance garnished my cheque. When I asked how I was to feed my boy, they told me to go to welfare or try the food bank. They take food out of my son's mouth to give it to my ex. My daughter's clothes come from the secondhand store, but my ex always has enough money to hire a sitter so she and her friends can go out. I have lost all faith in the justice system iand I think deadbeat dads should have a men's movement and put those deadbeat moms in there place. PS, When I sent to child welfare services with reports of this as well as of my kids being beaten while there, nothing was done.

Date: May 21, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I am the wife of a wonderful divorced father of three kids. What a living hell it has been for him and me the last 10 years. If I didn't love and respect him as much as I do I would have been outta here years ago. The only light at the end of the tunnel is that we only have three years of child support left and hopefully never having to deal with his ex again. His ex is never accountable for how she spends the child support but is always wanting more. Good thing my husband and I never had kids of our own, we wouldn't be able to afford them. She was the one who wanted the divorce because it wasn't FUN anymore. Why should my husband have to pay and pay and pay? It's illegal, immoral and unjust.

Date: May 21, 2001
Name: B.Reichardt

Comments:
I definitely think men get a raw deal and I have a son going thru this right now. I have recently become aware of a psychological disorder called Parental Alienation Syndrome. If you need information about PAS, just search the term on the internet. You will be overwhelmed with the number of sad and tragic tales, but there is very good information available on research in this area. I was made aware of this disorder by a man in Ontario working to develop a "Calling My Kids" call centre. Once established, this call centre will intervene on behalf of parents & grandparents where child contact has been disrupted. I as a grandmother and mother feel that we all need to do what we can, lend our support and try to get these laws changed. Too many are suffering.

Date: May 20, 2001
Name: Alexandria Engel

Comments:
My husband, the father of our 21-month-old daughter, with another due in a few months, was married before and has an 8-year-old daughter. We have been fighting with his ex for over 2 years about support. We paid up until October 2000, when I found out the child was not even living with her mother. The child was living with the maternal grandparents at the time, no money was paid to them.The mother lied to us for months about where the child was. When the child finally returned to her mother in February of 2001, we started to pay once again. Now, his ex has gone to maintenance and told them she had the child, and we are required to pay for those 5 months, plus other money she agreed we would not have to pay (e.g., if we have the child for more than 2 weeks, the child support would be prorated for that month. Unfortunately this was just a verbal agreement.). We are budgeted to our ying yang, and cannot afford this. What can we do now? I want my husband to go back to court and have some kind of agreement that he sees her for a month in the summer, set dates every year. We were supposed to have her for Christmas, but the ex decided last minute that we wouldn't. The mother has scared the daughter so bad about flying that she won't make the hour and 20 minute flight to see us by herself. So we have to pay for 3 round trip tickets. I just want to know what to do. We can't afford to hire a lawyer. Can we have something drawn up without having to return to the courts? Does anyone have any suggestions?

Date: May 19, 2001
Name: Patricia Duck

Comments:
The majority of noncustodial fathers are deadbeat. Access is a major problem as in court that usually is not specified. The best idea is to garnish these mens paycheques and give to the mothers. It is the responsibility of these fathers to contribute to their upbringing. If they own a business and they won't pay, take away their licences, I feel no pity for deadbeat Dads.

Date: May 19, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
It saddens me to read so many responses to this article that react only to the monetary or name calling issues associated with custody and access after divorce. He said ... she said ... they said ... in the end, does it really matter?

Yes, there are fathers who have children even though they have no interest in being a father. There are mothers out there who have done the same. Yes, there are fathers out there who are struggling to make ends meet because of financial support payments imposed upon them by a court. There are mothers out there who are doing the same. Yes, there are mothers out there who punish the father by keeping the children from him and by interfering in his relationship with the children; but, there are fathers out there who are doing the same to mothers.

I hear these complaints and wonder ... what are your children seeing, hearing, and feeling while you or your extended family worry and complain about your relationship with your ex? How does it make them feel to know that mom might somehow be driving dad to the poorhouse or that dad would rather have them spend time with a sitter than be allowed to spend an extra hour with mom on Mothers Day? Do they understand that your arguments have nothing to do with them? or do they believe that they are somehow the cause of all the trouble between you?

I am a recently divorced mother. Even though my exhusband wasn't interested in helping to raise the children while we were together, I thought it would be in the children's best interests to allow him the opportunity to learn after we split up. Even though I could not continue to live with my ex, I tried to understand that he is very important to our children and they want him in their lives. While I admit that I don't always want to include him, for the children's sake I try to give my ex every opportunity to spend time with our children ... to be involved in their lives ... to help celebrate their successes and achievements in life.

Unfortuneately, after 4 years, my ex (and his extended family) continue to believe that by not attending our children's religious celebrations, birthday parties, Christmas pageants ... that somehow they are punishing me. What people don't understand is that I am far more at ease when my ex doesn't show up! But, I am also far less happy because I see the disappointment in my children's faces. I hear the excuses they make for my ex and his family ... and they're good excuses ... I should know ... I help the children come up with them.

Do I regret the 50/50 "shared parenting" arrangement we currently have? No ... I'm glad I gave my ex the chance. Is shared parenting always in the children's best interest? No ... how could it be if my children are not allowed to acknowledge me in the presence of my ex's extended family? How could it be when my ex admits he doesn't want custody but will continue to fight for it just in case I someday change my mind about not wanting any money from him in terms of support?

I see our children growing angry and resentful of their father and his family for their actions. My lectures about being respectful to them are met with comments like "Why? They're never nice to you." Then their need for my ex's love shows itself in comments like, "Dad was really nice to you today ... maybe things are getting better."

It took me a long time to learn that it doesn't matter what rumors people make up about me ... or how they treat me. What matters is how you treat these other people who will always be a part of your children's life. You have to set the example and TRY ... no matter how difficult ... to do what you believe to be in your children's best interests. If you don't, what hope do they have in getting into a long lasting, healthy relationship? What hope do you have of continuing a good, loving relationship with your children as they grow into adulthood? How will you be able to look into their eyes to answer when they eventually ask you why you did what you did?

Please don't read this and take it to your ex to say ..."Look, this is what you should be doing!" Change in your relationship with your ex begins with you. If you look at each situation involving your ex and work at it from the angle of what's best for the children, you'll be amazed at the peace and happiness it will bring your children ... and you just might be amazed at how your children's happiness seeps into your heart to bring a bit of that peace and happiness into your own soul.

It may take years for your ex to stop trying to fight with you ... even after both of you may have moved into new and more fulfilling relationships; but, aren't your kids worth the effort to try?

Date: May 18, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
For many months I have been a witness to the torment of a close friend of mine who has been going through the end of his marriage. I was almost relieved when I read this article and imediately brought it to my poor friend who has been labelled a dead beat dad. It is very hard to watch someone be unjustly called this. He has never questioned his obligations to his child. He never tried to reduce payment and his only problem was that he was ordered to pay alimony to a woman who had covered her income well and made it look like she was just getting by. Are the courts so blind that they cannot see a woman who reports she is living on nine thousand dollars a year yet pays one thousand a month for a nice new home might be telling a lie or two?

I had a relationship with this woman. A friendship actually. I terminated this along with any positive feelings I ever had for her when I saw her turn her child into a pawn and a personal cash cow. The bottom line for her has always been money and in the end, was a huge part of the marital breakdown. So now, a young girl is even more neglected. Her mommy is too busy getting revenge because she has little else to do and her daddy is not allowed to see her very often because mommy doesn't follow court orders.

So as the former wife is out shopping with a ridiculous amount of money to burn and the husband aches for a few more minutes each month to watch his child grow. I say, let's start a new agency that investigates the manipulators of these poor kids minds. What could the fine be for the abuse of their children in the name of revenge? What kind of dollar figure can be put on that?

Date: May 18, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I fully agree with your article. 34 years ago after a messy divorce where I gave my ex-wife all our furnishing, accessories, souvenirs, camping equipment etc., I found myself in court with a very greedy woman. During divorce proceedings, I fought hard for visiting rights and when awarded faced constant battles to see my only son. After repeated court appearances where my ex was sternly reminded to allow access, I still was not able to see him regularly. When I could see him, we had to meet at constantly changing shopping centres, churches etc. There came a time when my job sent me to Western Canada. I could not afford to fly back to Ottawa and see my son, yet I regularly sent my support payment. One day, I received a court judgement increasing my monthly support by 250%. I was never informed of the proceedings nor could I pay a lawyer to argue. I quit my job, moved and never again contacted my son. I carry the hurt and sorrow to this day. There came a time when financialy I could fly East, but several years had gone by. What would I tell him about his "deadbeat dad". The biased courts, believing I was rich or whatever my ex told them, increased support payment to an amount which forced me to abandon my fatherly side. I hope one day to meet my son, who should be 38 years old now. I dread the encounter but should he make steps to reach me, I would. Deadbeat? No. I was crushed by a system which gave me no recourse. Eventually, I remaried, but children were completely out of the question. I could not start a new family. The hurt and longing lingers on.

Date: May 18, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
After reading the article in the April 2001 issue I truly can relate to all of it as I have been going through a bitter divorce for well over a year. Our 3 year old daughter has been kept from me on many occasions even though there has been a court ordered schedule for us to spend time together. I have my support payments taken directly off of my pay cheque from work. Her lawyer delayed relaying information to the Attorney General in hopes that when the "over due" payments would begin coming off of my pay cheque, it would force me to lose our home. He came very close but I rented out the basement of my house to individuals that were collecting social assistance. I lived off of the extra income for 8 months but was forced to sell the home regardless. This was a home that I owned well before I ever met my spouse. I purchased it at the age of 23. It was the third home that I owned. I am now 34. To say that my former spouse is benefiting, is a severe understatement.
My occupation is a machine operator in a factory. I work longs hours on a rotating shift. She doesn't work but she used to when we were married.
Before we were married she was inflicted with a disease that has become more common lately in todays society. Since our marriage she has managed to obtain large amounts of financial assistance from various sources and actually brings home more "net" than I do. Regardless I still pay the required child support and a substancial amount of alimony. She is living in a brand new house paying a large amount of rent and I have been forced to move in with a friend after the sale of the home. The custody of our child has not been decided yet. I am fighting for joint custody and she is fighting for sole custody.
The comments that I have heard in the court room have left me shaking my head wondering why there are not even more fathers putting ropes around their necks. Personally I have often worked over 60 hour weeks in 100+ degree heat, paid my support payments and have still been refused time with my daughter, only because her mother wanted it this way. This form of "punishment" has seemed to have gone unrecognized in todays society. People like myself who pay every last dollar they can just to be able to spend time with their child and help them grow into decent human beings are lablled as "deadbeat". What really puts the icing on the cake is when the law supports the money hungry mothers that think the "ex" is just another part of the "system" that allows them to live life to the fullest and honestly, truly, get the last laugh. The statement of "do what is best for the children" simply is not researched well enough for each case. It seems as though whoever has the best lawyer, wins. With the cards stacked against men to begin with, its not hard to see who benefits from a divorce. It is sad that the law does not enforce mothers to maintain schedules that are ordered by the court where it pertains to time that the child is supposed to spend with the father.

Date: May 17, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Your article "Do you think fathers get a raw deal" points out the real story. It's to bad that most of society does not see it this way. As usual the exception is considered before all else, both in terms of how judges and our politicians view the world of custody, child support and spousal maintanence. I havn't met a judge or a politician yet, who truely understands the importance of fathering or fair finances. Unfortunately the awful fact is some men can't afford to feed their children even if they can see them. It is extremely difficult to hold down a job, even at an executive level with good pay, when your net take home after the support payments is less than the poverty level. Your expected to look and perform to the level of pay received, difficult to do when living in poverty.
Between my wife and I we support two homes as her ex husband pays nothing towards the upbringing of their two children. He has no job and generous access clearly he is important to his childrens lives.

Date: May 17, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I do not mind paying child suport for my son, it's my obligation, but I should not be paying my ex 800.00 an month, when she works, full time, owns her own home, has had a live in, but due to my taking he back to court, kicks him out each time.In court, the divorce stated she had to work 35 hours per week, well she works 32 and will never work 35, why should she. (our great courts)Ive written letters stating I will pay her the extra 3 hours, but the judge slaps me and tells me to read the final document from 6 years ago. Iv'e had my wages guar. not for lack of payment but due to the fact that I told her lawyer I was broke and the guarancee comenced immediately, I am not a dead beat dad, She's a dead beat mom, I have my son every other weekend, talk to him every day, I take him to hockey every weekend in winter, and in summer we beach it. When he arrives a my house (I pick him up) he has to go right to the bath, he's filthy, usually comes with no clean clothes or dirty ones, no tooth brush, which he now wears braces (which i pay 1/2 for) over and above the 1500.00 per month, because he needed them and she said she would not get them if I didnt split the costs.( I have coverage,) I speaking of the over and above. I was driven out of my home by her drug/alcohol addiction/prozac popper. And I have to suffer financially due to this. I hope the book is re written and I get my ex spouse payments dropped.

Date: May 17, 2001
Name: Brian Kelly

Comments:
After reading dozens of the letters from other fathers, it is obvious many of us share the same problems. One thing that seems to be lacking is a united organization to fight against the injustices we are experiencing. If anyone knows of any, I would like to join. Otherwise I wish to start one myself. Please contact me at:

briankelly01@netscape.net

Thank You.

Date: May 17, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Yes I do think they get a raw deal, a very big raw deal.
I know of 2 men, that have ex-wives, that pay far more, than they can for child support, but yet they are classified as deadbeats. The government has an ad on TV, stating that child support is a two way street, so how come these women are not obligated in finding a job to help support their children. 8 out of 10 women I know, and some lawyers I know agree, that these women don't even spend the child support on the children, and some of these women get more for child support than I do working for a living, and they get to sit at home and wait for the next support cheque to come. 4 of the 8 either sit in the bars or go on nice vacations with the child support. An example, this woman picked up her child support (it was cash), dropped the kids off at the sitters, and used the money for a motel room, booze and cigarettes. Other times were 2 trips to Las Vegas and one to Pennsylvania.

One of these men had custody of one child, the ex-spouse had custody of the other child. She not only lied to her lawyer, but also the judge on her income so she wouldn't have to pay any child support. She didn't have to provide proof of income, but yet the father did.
Not only that, but the judge granted custody to the woman, only because she is a woman, when the father had interim custody of them. The judge said, "The children always goes to the woman", without even looking at the file. If he had looked at the file, he would have seen that she was charged with snapped of abduction of the children, basically kidnapping, (the father had no idea where his kids were), and held them in a motel room for 3 days. Not even letting them outside to play.
This woman was also charged with assault. In this file was proof that the woman neglected them, locking them outside in the cold with only a t shirt and shorts on.
So where is the logic here??
My personal opinion is that child support should be paid in the way of buying the kids new clothes, paying for sports, or dancing lessons etc.,and/or groceries, and not giving these people any money that they could spend on themselves.

Date: May 16, 2001
Name: Katherine Evans

Comments:
I was saddened to hear of the various "dads" who felt they had no way out of their financial burdens but by the way of suicide. I cannot imagine a situation being so bad that the ex-spouse would impose such financial demands on the father of the children. Children deserve to have the love of both parents whether in the same household or not. It is a tough enough life without adding to the stress our children endure throughout their life. I am all for shared custody. Of course if abuse is a factor, from either parent, then the decision for custody as well as visitation would be crucial. Let our children enjoy their life and learn to love by example. Continually showing anger and hatred toward the non-custodial parent is extemely damaging to a child's wellness. For heaven's sake and that of the child, be tolerant and civil. There is no need for a child to feel pressured when it comes time to visit or talk to the non-custodial parent. I have to wonder how one spouse can detest another when at one time they must have loved one another for them to have children. Or am I so naive that love is not a pre-requesite for raising a child. Love your children. They love you both.

Date: May 16, 2001
Name: Jody L. Kopec

Comments:
I have been consistently shocked with the system of government that knowingly harrasses the good men of this country. The Family Maintenance Enforcement people should be ashamed of their selves. Suicide and despair. How does that effect the children? I think that if given the choice the children would rather have their parent alive, than receiving their money! I understand that some people just refuse to accept their responsibilities is raising their own children, but it is not the only problem with our society. The courts can make a decision, but it should be up to the government to have consideration to each individual case. The response from Family Maintenance is to pass the buck, and hide behind policy & procedure manuals. Where is there compassion for our fellow man. Our world is greatly lacking in moral judgements, and I am frustrated in our society. Can't someone help?

I thought the article was fantastic, and really shared with the reader, the upsetting situation that exists within the parameters of 'legislation'.

Date: May 16, 2001
Name:

Comments:
As a former banker and current credit union manager I can say, unequivocally, that men almost always, get a raw deal. I've witnessed many instances where mothers who are neglectful, abusive, alcoholic and/or drug dependant get not only custody of the children but the bulk of the marital property. This, too, has been the case with friends as well as members and clients. This is not a sexist observation. My sister, who was until last year a practicing lawyer, left the profession and went back to school to get an MBA. She did so to enhance her prospects of new employment. The catalyst which drove her to such drastic action was the number of times she and her counterparts represented men who, by all accounts, were good and supportive fathers and who, upon having their day in court, were faced with minimal visitation rights and brought, or nearly brought, to bankruptcy. There is, undoubtedly, a reluctance on the part of our family judicial system to realistically and objectively assess the rights of fathers.

Date: May 16, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Yea I think a lot of the time fathers get a raw deal. Lots of time the mother remarries and she and her new husband both work but the father still has to pay huge amount in child support anyway. I agree fathers should support their children but the amount should be fair and should be reviewed every couple of years or so because a situation can change a lot in a couple of years. I also think fathers should have equal rights as far as custody . There are a lot of fathers that would choose to keep their child if they were given a choice.I think the law needs to be change on that and fathers and mothers given the same rights.

Date: May 16, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Not only are fathers are getting a raw deal, kids that are denided excess to there fathers are as well. I was forced out of the house this past Boxing Day, (from an argument about her affair)and have seen my two kids (4 & 2 years old) who I raised, but 4 times since then. I only hope after reading your artical I can continue to have hope that justice will be done and I don't have to go back to living in my car.

Date: May 15, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Having experienced the court system of this country as a father I know absolutly that it is a very dishonest, unjust and hostile place for fathers and their children. God help the child who has a parent who decides to divorce, to the Court they are merely a form of currency.
Reading the hundreds of response here in this pole it is apparent that many, many people in Canada also know this. If only politicians who sit idely by allowing this discrimination and persecution to happen could be convinced that they wont be politicians next election if they dont do something now to clean up our less than third world court system and divorce laws. Maybe we all should tell our M.P. that we want a presumptive equal rights for all, divorce act administered by an honest fair minded court system. Our children deserve no less.

Date: May 15, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I was recently divorced after 10 yrs of so called marriage. My ex stayed in the matrimonial home until it was sold (about one year), I continued to pay the mortgage and all the other bills (utilities, phone, etc.)I was told that that`s the way it is for the man pay, pay, pay. While paying rent and all other bills for my tiny one bedroom apt. I was very fortunate to find an extremely good lawyer who took my case and saved me thousands of dollars, my ex thought she would get everything but my lawyer ended that thought. She got half the proceeds from the house and she also had to repay me half of the expenses from the matimonial home (mortgage, utilities, phone, etc.). I was lucky to find a good lawyer who stood up to fight for my rights as a man, and not let the woman walk away with everything. It was expensive but worth it. There are many fathers out there that aren`t that lucky, and I think that there should be something done to make it more fair for the man, and not so easy for the woman to walk away with everything and leave the man barely surviving from month to month. I am on disability benifits, I get about $29,000 a year from that. The judge figured because I`m on WCB and it`s tax free that I should have to pay the amount that $29,000 would be before taxes so therefore I pay $548 a month for two kids, I also pay half of there extra curicular activities (sports, camps, etc.)but she has to provide an offical receipt. I was lucky and I only hope that others out there can be as lucky, and if not I hope that the system changes to protect them.

Date: May 15, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
The myth of the deadbeat dad has been largely inflated. Statistics show that most fathers do pay support and do remain active fathers. Most of the fathers who don't, simply can't afford to pay the outrageous support payments awarded by the courts. While I can sympathize with the mother's who have been left penniless and at the mercy of deadbeat dads, it deplorable that the rest of us fathers share the same label and are treated with utter contempt due to the inactions of this small group of people.

If a person of either gender chooses to be a deadbeat parent, there is little anyone can do about it. These same individuals continue to skirt the system and do not get adequately punished. Where there is the will to avoid their responsibilities, a way will be found to achieve this goal. Little can be done by government intervention who actually make things worse as what is now unfolding as a result of the latest reforms. Loving dedicated fathers are finding themselves in hopeless situations as a result of these laws. Many have given up, are working under the table, or have fled, becoming the very essence of what the laws were put in place to eradicate. Family law is a complex issue which will not be fixed by the current government legislation.

As a society, it must be clear that some balance be struck before we see the complete meltdown of the family unit. I certainly wouldn't wish the repercussions I have faced on anyone. Unless things dramatically change, you can be sure I will do my best to discourage my sons from entering into anything resembling marriage. Moreover, I will make them fully aware of the ramifications of having children if that is what they choose.

Date: May 15, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
How can I help change the system.
Many fathers are better primary care givers than mothers, however this is rarely considered in awarding custody.

I have a son whom I feel is being unfairly taken advantage of by his spouse and by the system. His spousal and child support is based on working 25 overtime hours per week, not per month or year - per week.

Date: May 15, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Deadbeat Dad - what about the Spiteful Mom?

I find it absolutely appalling that we hear so much about "deadbeat dads" who don't pay their child support and we hear VERY LITTLE about custodial parents (we don't even need to be gender specific) who use their children as a tool to spite the non-custodial parent. I am talking about the parents who withhold visitation, medical records, school records, etc. as a means to punish the non-custodial parent. Reading through all of the comments posted here (and from personal experience as well) it is apparent that this type of "power-play" happens often.

WHAT DOES IT SAY ABOUT US AS A NATION THAT WE ARE SO ANGRY AT DEADBEAT DADS FOR NOT PAYING THE $$$, YET WE HEAR VERY LITTLE ABOUT THE EMOTIONAL ABUSE INFLICTED BY AN ANGRY EX-SPOUSE?

Why does it always seem to be about money? I feel SO much angrier at the mother who won't let the father see his child - as a punishment to the father. This type of behavior is rampant in our society, yet it is allowed to happen. There is no punishment. Why are we so eager to punish for not paying money, yet we don't punish this kind of emotional abuse? Where are the priorities? I agree that it is wrong to not support your children - but there are more types of support than just financial.

We have an agency to enforce payment of maintenance (FMEP), but where is the agency to help enforce visitation rights? My husband had his order filed with FMEP even though he had NEVER missed a child support payment (a waste of taxpayers dollars in my opinion). His ex-wife would not let him see or talk to his daughter - it took six months & thousands of dollars to a lawyer & going through the courts, just to get back his visitation that he had to begin with - just because she (the ex-wife) was angry with him. This happened on two separate occasions. He missed out on a year of his daughters life because of an angry and spiteful ex-wife. He can never get that year back. What punishment is there for her? NONE. Where was the help he needed to enforce his parental rights? There was no help. There were only lawyers. And he was fortunate enough to be able to pay them. What about the father who cannot. Where does he turn? THE PARENT WHO IS BEING WRONGED IN THIS TYPE OF SITUATION NEEDS JUST AS MUCH ATTENTION AS THE PARENT WHO IS NOT RECEIVING HER MONTHLY CHEQUE.

Date: May 15, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Are you kidding? I want nothing more than to be the best father I can be and I conceived our children with a woman who I loved very deeply and vice - versa and choose me to be a co - parent. Why do women think they have exclusivity on parenting and turn into the anti - christ for support payments? I am very fortunate to have an ex - wife who has given me some concessions to parenting and the financial support I must pay her, although it's still not fair to me or our children. To get to this point I had to show her that it would be in her best interest not to spend all of our money in the courts and on the blood sucking lawyers and that we would both be further ahead in the end. There were moments that I thought we were headed to war, with our family being completely devastated. After seeing some of my friends get wasted by their evil ex - wives because they have the power given to them by the courts I wondered what my ex would do. Fortunately, she consented to go to mediation, and while her and I have split, our sons have not been casualties of a long, costly, bitter, custody battle. I still didn't get 50% of my sons' time and they need me as much as they need her but it's a women's world and she calls the shots. Someday, my sons will know the whole story.

Date: May 14, 2001
Name:

Comments:
When I was a 19 year old cook making approximately $800 a month I was told by the courts to pay $400 a month in child support because I worked at a warehouse one summer. The reasoning behind this is because the average warehouse wage is 14 dollars an hour even though I only made 7. A year later I applied to have it reduced when I went to university but because my student loan for the year was almost as much as I made as a cook the Judge said,"well you should still be able to pay the 400 a month." although the point was that I was never able to pay.
After years of accumulating a debt, being garnished, made to feel worthless, they finally instituted the legislation to regulate what each father pays according to his income, I hired a lawyer, I couldn't afford, to have the support reduced. Now I can afford the support payment but the two hundred dollar backsupport payment each month leaves me just barely getting by. The back child support was never reduced to a reasonable amount even though it is approximately four times the amount I would have owed under the new legislation.
On top of all that I haven't seen my daughter in about four years even though we live in the same city. The last time I saw her she was three and when she saw me she started sceaming,"daddy is a bad man."
I also contemplated suicide over these painful times. I felt the courts decided my life and my worth. I was young,had sex,and was poor which in the courts eyes and my daughter's makes daddy a bad man.
I thank you so much for righting the article on the myth of deadbeat dads. It doesn't really ease the bitterness I feel about being a parent but it helps to no I'm not alone in this horrible bradishment as a subhuman parent who doesn't deserve the same respect as my money grubbing ex who won't let me see my daghter even when I do pay, but she's a whole other story.

Date: May 13, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Absolutley, I believe that men get a raw deal. The current "guide" in use is far too rigid, both in application, and the way it is written. It has the potencial to devastate one life in order to promote the standard of living for another. Some form of control should be used when coming up with very poor ideas such as the guide, instead of creating a monetary free for all, between the payee's and their lawyers. Some ideas that, personally, I believe would help to improve the situation, on both sides are:
1. Take both incomes( net or gross), subtract the smaller from the larger then base support payments on that amount.
2. Make payments reduce annually by a percent, so that at the time that support ends, it is not such a drastic loss of income and, allows, the payor to build a future instead of depending on a government pension.
3. If the payee takes up residence with a thrid party, both of those incomes should be included, so that the payor is not paying for someone else's mortgage or the like, and better able to provide for themselves.

The time has come to seriously question equality in the courts. In this day and age, ignoring exactly one half of all cases is ureasonable for a country such as ours, or should I say hers? Constantly in the news you hear of Canada critizing other countries for they're poor track record on human rights, who's the hypocrite. When the government ignores the pleas of its own citizens, solely based on gender, and is willing to put all its backing and force behind one group, no longer is that a democracy. It is oppression in its purest from.

Date: May 12, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I am sorry to hear that this problem still persists to such a degree. Of the father's (about 20) that I personally know who are/were required to pay child support only one was actually a "dead beat dad", while most of the rest (15) were being asked to pay more than they could afford. Of the mother's that I personally know who are/were receiving child support payments and was not getting the amount the court ordered, everyone of them considered their ex-husbands to be a "dead beat dad". So, the people that I know definitely demonstrate that "dead beat dads" is mostly an undeserved crime.

As for trying to get the amount adjusted, I have this to recommend:
1)fire the lawyer from the case,
2)hire a certified accountant
and
3)have the accountant present when your case is
being heard by a judge.

This may sound odd or out of place at first, but one definition of a certified accountant is "a financial lawyer". Just like you would not ask an urologist to fix your teeth, why hire a divorce lawyer or criminal lawyer to fix your financial legal problems?

Date: May 12, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
If there is anyone to blame for the mistreatment of fathers it would be us. Our abuse from goverment agencies is only a result from our attitude of 'take it like a man'. Our only way to get out of this problem is to organise, oganise, organise. We have to let them know in a LOUD clear united voice, that we will not support any politician that upholds these unfair policies. Until the politicians feel thier job security threatened they will do nothing........

Date: May 12, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Family court is an instrument of evil existing solely to rubber stamp the demands of abusive women.
I have been there and going again because my wife found a perfect guy while vacationing in Florida. The key to success in family court is to treat the legalized extortion as you would any other. DO NOT SUBMIT TO THE THREAT. TREAT THE SYSTEM AS A JOKE AND YOU WILL SURVIVE.

Date: May 11, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Do you think divorced fathers often get a raw deal?

No, I think divorced fathers ALLWAYS GET A RAW DEAL!!!

The current laws are written requarding divorce/child support/spousal support, so that the man, doesn't really have a chance.

In the event of a marriage breakdown involving children, the courts quite often rule in favour of the "mother".

Does the fact the that "mother's infedelity" enter into the courts decision? I think not. (unless you have 15,000.00 to spare for a trial)

So...the father moves out, sets up another household, has limited or NO child visitation, and somehow has to carve out a living maintaining "child support payments". Thus the father, being denied his right to see his children, plus the fact of financial deprivity.

I make 2000.00/month clear. Take away the following deductions:
Rent 649.00 (includes parking, one bedroom)
elec 25.00
phone 25.00 (no long distance)
CS 808.00 (child support, according to my
last 3 years of employment)
Car Pay233.30 (I would rather drive and make
payments on a newer car than
drive a beater, and not be at the
mercy of the infamous "auto-
mechanic")
Visa 150.00 (had to borrow from visa, beacuse
I did not have enough funds to
make ends meet, the bulk of it
to pay my lawyer!)
Ins 71.50 (you have to have car ins.....
its against the law not to)

TTL 1951.80

This leaves me a total of 48.20/month to purchase food/clothing/gas for my economy car/mainteniance for the car.......let alone expenses incurred, when my children actually have been allowed to visit. Not to metion any of one hundred stituations that may arise month to month to cause further financial difficulty.

Pending the decision by the "judge" of the courts, I may be entittled to pay "spousal support" on top of all this. How wonderful!

I await the judge's decision, allready knowing, that it will not be favourable to the "Father" of his children.

I may ask my Lawyer to challenge the "Judge" on which way he may decide, with his all knowing power and judgement, for a person to be able to eat/cloth/provide gas for his vehicle to get to work/etc....for 48.20/month.

I think not.

I am headed for the "ditch" (becoming homeless and living in my car...for the summer months)/ suicide (against my religion)/ and paying the unreal amounts that shall be awarded by the courts!

Ya, I'd have to say that "fathers" get a real sweet deal. They are denied their children, denied any sense of finacial balance and denied their dignity!

You decide. I live in this turmoil!

Date: May 11, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I feel that the Courts in many cases are unfair to the divorced father. I know of one that can't keep abreast of his payments as they take up just about all of his wages. He is an hourly worker and does not receive the same pay each week. The Courts, so far, do not recognize this - they just say he has to keep paying. I feel that payments should also stop when the child has reached the age of 19. The way it is now, the child could keep going to school and not get a job.

Date: May 11, 2001
Name:

Comments:
The Federal Department of Justice is currently consulting Canadians on this whole issue of custody and access. Unfortunately it seems to be a very closely gaurded secrect.

Please call 1 888 373-2222 for copies of the discussion paper and response booklet. Deadline is June 15 ! Please participate and support Shared Parenting and put a stop to the court order financial extortion of Fathers!

Date: May 11, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I am in a relationship with a divorced man who faithfully pays his child support. His ex-wife took him to court in an attempt to get additional money; he offered a settlement, which she rejected. After the judgment, she ended up with less than what he originally offered, plus they both had enormous legal bills. Who wins in this situation? The lawyers! Furthermore, although they have joint custody, and their agreement states they will share information about the children with one another, his ex-wife refuses to provide him with school reports, etc. It also appears one of the children has been negatively influenced by the mother and will not visit the father. There is little the father can do unless he takes the matter back to court, and this is an expensive prospect. If he takes it to court and wins, it will cost a great deal of money, and then how is he to care for his children? This is a man who loves his children, but has been torn apart because of his ex-wife's cruelty, and he cannot afford to fight her in court! I think this is a travesty, and I wish there was something I could do to help. I know he has been on the brink of suicide and only the realization that at least one of his two children loves and needs him kept him from going through with it.

There may be deadbeat dads out there, but in my experience, the majority of divorced dads want to be involved in their kids lives, not just fork over a cheque once a month. Is there any place they can go for help?

Date: May 11, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I do not believe that every divorced father gets a "raw deal". The support payer (in this case fathers) complain that when they 'fall behind' in support payments they are labeled as a deadbeat. I do not think that they take into account how much money it really does take to raise a child in a year or on a month to month basis. The parent raising the child does not have the choice to 'miss a beat' due to all of the responsibility of raising a child. At the point of a missed payment, the child is the one who suffers next to the mother. The mother feels the first impact of the missing money and the next to feel the missed payment is the child. If the payment is missed during the month that soccer or dance classes start...what then, the child can not participate due to the lack of responsibility of the support payer? I truely do not believe that the support payer realizes the deep impact on the child of 'missed' payments. Missed child support payments are down-played far to often these days. There are too many children living in poverty to allow this type of behavior to continue. I do not think that the laws are strict enough with when it comes to consequences of late payments. To many people turn a bind eye to the reality of the problems at hand in regards to this topic. When all is said and done, it is our children who get the true "RAW DEAL".

Date: May 10, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
My brother has been battling his ex-wife for two years now on the issue of child support and spousal support. Since May 1st of 2000, she has been co-habitating with another man in the matrimonial home. Thye live openly together.

My brother has never disputed his obligations to his son and is more than willing to pay chid support. It is the spousal supoort that he feels is so wrong.

Their final mediation hearing was in Dec of 2000 at which time my brother was told that he must continue paying spousal support of $600.00 per month for at least another year even knwoing that his wife was living with another man. He was forced to sign over his share of the house in order to protect his pension. The mediator said the relationship with the other man was too new. On Dec 20th, my brother signed over his interest in the property to his wife and her boyfriend. They have a mortgage together and joinlty now own the house. The boyfriend earns over $50,000.00 per year.

HE was forced to pay child support for her children from a previous marraige which she has ordered support for. Their father's obligation was then reduced. As well, the two older children left home in 2000 and she never informed the courts. When my brother raised the issue, she said she had needed the money, so the court did not order it repaid but increased her spousal support.

On the threat fo it costing him $5000.00 to take the matter to court and no guarantee of winning he agreed to the terms. My brother makes approx $950 every two weeks of which he gives her $507.70. After paying his rent and heat, he can't even afford a telephone.

His ex-wife now sports diamond engagment ring and she and her live in have almost completely renovated the house. My brother lives in a tiny one bedroom apt with borrowed furniture. He was not even allowed half of the furnishings. The court that because he abandoned her and the children by leaving, he gave up all rights to any possessions. He only left because when she threatened to leave he felt on a temporary basis is was much easier for him to bunk in with a freind than her find a place with four children. When he wanted to come home she would have no part of it. She was allowed to sell anything that she did not want..

We are all bitter and angry and would like to know if there are any services available to my brother to try and correct this terrible situation.

My brother suffered a heart attack and our fear is that the stress of all of this will lead to further health probems or the loss of my nephews father.

His wife has had a free ride the entire time. Legal Aid has paid her legal bills. Why settle and be fair when the costs are not coming out of your pocket as my brothers were. He owes his lawyer $6500 and the lawyer is breathing down his thrat for payment. The original retainer was paid by family. My brother has nothing at 45 years old.

If there are any support groups out there or legal avenues that he could go to for help, please let us know...

Thank you

Date: May 10, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Do I think father often get a raw deal!

I am a father of three children, (12,10, & 8)who has been separated for three and one half years. Prior to separation, I was a well respected professional working my way up the corporate ladder. Financially, we were on solid ground. The mortgage on our four bedroom home in the suburbs was more than half paid and both of us had significant savings in our RRSP's. Except for relatively low monthly payments on our car loans we were virtually debt free.

After we separated, I continued to pay the mortgage and all expenses for the ex-spouse and the children. I also provided her with biweekly payments to cover other expenses. All the while managing to remain an active and loving father for my children. One and one half years after separation, the ex obtained a court order forcing me to pay over two thirds of my net income for child/spousal support. I was physically, mentally, emotionally, and financially devastated.

By this time I had cashed my RRSP's and my savings were exhausted. Due to my inability to pay the excessive amount of support, arrears were accumulating rapidly (the order was also retroactive). I was thereafter forced to sign over my interests in the matrimonial home and just about everything else I had worked for directly to my ex-spouse. In return, I obtained a reduction in spousal support and my arrears were cleared. However, she continues to get 50% of my net salary which will continue for many, many more years. Throughout this time, the ex has refused to work and would not contribute financially for her or the children's support. Only recently has she begun working on a part-time basis.

This has left me with a very bleak outlook for the future. I am thousands of dollars in debt, can barely pay my bills, and my car has fallen into disrepair. Furthermore, I don't even have the money for travel, meals, or other expenses associated with exercising my child visitation privileges. My feelings of despair have certainly taken its toll. As a result, I have had difficulty staying focused at my workplace and have been on medical leave for extended periods of time. Not surprisingly, my relations with my employer have dramatically soured. It is clear that I am no longer welcome and effort has been made to encourage my resignation. Once I am forced out, it is unlikely I will find another job at my present salary level. Irregardless of my income I will still be expected to pay my current rate of support and my arrears will again accumulate rapidly. Without assets to exchange for support arrears, I will then be subject to the full wrath of the Family Responsibility Office

It has become increasingly difficult for me to get up for work each morning knowing my standard of living will continue to disintegrate while the ex-spouse remains unchanged due solely to my financial contributions. However, the most difficult part for me is the fact that no matter what I do or how much I give, the current social climate considers me as a deadbeat dad. The tyrannical connotations this label holds is at par with murderers and pedophiles. It has been said that this is a bad time to be a divorced father. My experiences definitely support this view. I liken the current social attitude to one that parallels the medieval witch-hunts. No matter what us fathers say or do, we are still deadbeat dads who must be dealt with to the full extent of the law. It deplorable how the courts, family judicial system, and society in general has chosen to treat the fathers of our children!

Signed,
A very disillusioned and demoralized father.

Date: May 09, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
DEADBEAT MOTHER?This story goes back a number of years.I paid support while the kids lived with their mother. When she decided to leave her children and move to Toronto.(The childern decided they wanted to stay in Wpg. with me) After she left I couldn't afford to get a lawyer to go after her for support. When I would guestion her on the phone for help with money. She would say I deserve some help, but none ever arrived. Fathers do get raw deals

Date: May 09, 2001
Name: Brent Duguay

Comments:
I'm often stricken by how support payments are seen as the main indicator of whether a father is a worthy one or not. Our children need love and time to grow into healthy adults. Are all the financially poor men around the world bad fathers because they don't have money to give? The love of a good father and the time his children spend with him can't be quantified by governments. Perhaps it's time that the contribution of fathers to their children in other ways than financial be studied and recognised instead of following the stereotype that men care less about their children and are less able to be nurturing than their mothers.

Date: May 09, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I am in the process of negotiating a seperation agreement for my recent seperation. There is a 3 yr old involved in this relationship. Our marriage fell apart due to a relationship my wife had outside the relationship. I do not have "court acceptable proof" so it is not being used as grounds. Therefore we are negotiating on the grounds of a normal marriage breakdown with no fault or blame. What I can't figure out is this. My wife and her boyfriend are still together and plan to move in together once all the papers are signed. My wife makes approx. $80,000 per year and her boyfriend makes approx. $95,000 per year for a total of approx. $175,000 per year. Their "large" home will be close to mortgage free and they have no other debts with a total asset base of an estimated $500,000. I am on disability and receive approx. $30,000 per year. I own a small home which is mortgage free and I have total assets inc. the house of approx $200,000. What I don't understand is why our laws don't take into consideration the financial situation of both parties when deciding the child support payments. The goverment supplied chart only uses the fathers income as the guideline. Why is a father who makes $30k paying money to someone who makes $80k with an extra household income of $95K. I get to see my child one night per week only. Thats four nights a month. The only other time I get to see her is when my wife can't find a baby sitter. This system needs to be changed. I have no problem helping to raise my child and pay for those things that I can afford to pay for. I spend all my extra money on my child leaving me broke at the end of almost every month. Fathers need a life too. A poor depressed father is not a good thing for a daughter to see or have to visit. Maybe if we had a few extra dollars to live on, we could smile a little more at our kids when they visit.

Date: May 08, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Dear Readers Digest

It was with great interest that I read your article on so called "deadbeat dads" The article truly represents the effort put forth by most fathers to be responsible parents.I have had personal experence in these matters since 1985 and no real meaningful changes have occured which have benifeted a father to more involved in his childrens life ex wives are allowed to move anywhere and if a father wishes to see his children he must incur the costs which when you are already paying high support payments with no tax relief is difficult.With the newest support guidelines I am unable to work overtime in order to make extra money for my visits because the guidelines just look at gross income and if I was to work extra I would pay higher taxes and more child support then would be obligated to try and work this amount every year.Over the period of time I have paid support payments I have averaged 1000 dollars per year in legal fees just defending ex s desired increases and battling for specfic visitation time.It is very frustrating and I know how some fathers just give up.

Date: May 08, 2001
Name: Grant Boucher

Comments:
I often see young fathers pushing carriages and strollers changing diapers etc. simply caring for and nuturing their children. I am happy for them but also sad. I also cared for my children far more than my father did . But that can all end and it will for many of the fathers I have seen.In Canada we have an old an out dated law that we as men can not seem to change. When I faced the end of my marriage the end of my family life it almost cost me my life. I could not stand the loss of my children,the obstructions to my visitation and the alienation of the children to me. It was to much for me individually to stand.If it were not for my parents I would not be here today. I have now recovered to hate the current family law and all those who impose it. To other fathers experiencing the loss stand tall you will get through it. All fathers separated from their children or not should stand up and be heard ,demonstrate, scream , write stop the injustice.

Date: May 07, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I agree absolutely that most fathers are getting
a raw deal. Too many women use the system using
their the boo hoo tactics. I personally know of a
case where the father is being taken to the cleaners and it seems everywhere he turns he runs into a stone wall. the money its costing him is
unbelievable. At this point hes paying out hand over fist and rent on top of that. he also has his 12 year old son living with him as he does not want to live at home. you are certainly right about this driving some men to suicide and this is an awful price for any man to pay for a mistake usually made by two people.I fully believe things should be evened out much better and each partner take their share of the responsibilty and finances thus allowing some
sort of life for everyonr concerned.

Date: May 07, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
This is such a nasty issue. I have been really lucky with my 'ex'. He has always remained a part of our lives. He has helped with our daughter in so many ways, though his child support payments are on the low end of the scale. We rarely discuss the payments, because it is a sensitive issue. I do not look at him as a bank. I do believe that both parents should share the expenses of raising the child that THEY brought into this world. Things like the day to day things need to be addressed. Such as shelter,food,energy costs etc. Here's the way I see it; I have to pay for the rent, with out my child I could live in a smaller residence. I buy the groceries, with out my child I would have one less person to feed. (teenagers eat constantly, and lots!) With out my child, my hydro bill would probably be about 1/2 of what it is now. (teenagers shower every day, they wash their clothes every day, the have all the lights on as well as having the tv and ghetto-blaster all going at the same time!) I drive constantly, to school,back from school, to the part time job and back. I am not trying to say "Oh poor me..." I am saying that if the shoe was on the other foot... His whole life would be different if our child were to live with him. He couldn't come and go as he choses, as he does now. He would have to provide the bedroom in his house, the full fridge, and the rides to and from where ever. Like I said earlier, he does provide the emotional care and interest that alot of dads don't. I know that he loves his kid. I just wish that he would realize how much it really does cost to house and feed a smaller version of us.(especially when he makes almost three times what I do, and I work full time)

Date: May 07, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Sure. Lots of Dad's get a raw deal, but I think the people who really get the raw deal are the children when parents don't provide support and contact. I met one dad who told me he doesn't pay child support because his daughters are bitches because they didn't like his new wife. (I guessed she is about 6 years older than the oldest daughter) I hope he gets his just desserts. Since he lives in Alberta, and makes lots of money, I can only assume that province doesn't have any programs for abandoned children.

Date: May 06, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
In some occasions, the fathers have a difficult time with the regulating agencies. I worked for one, and saw some of these cases first-hand. Keep in mind that the number of cases is astronomical, and errors do occur. I am not excusing the treatment some fathers get, but I also recognize that beaurocracy plays a big role.

As for specific cases (e.g. the father that continues to pay years after the "child" is working), it is the legislation that creates the problem. The regulating agency only has the right to enforce the legislation of the day ... not TODAY, but the day the court order was made. If, at that time, the law didn't stipulate an end date, it was up to the judge to place one on the order. If it wasn't, the non-custodial parent MUST go back to court. This must be extremely frustrating for the parent, but it is THE LAW. There is nothing anyone can do, except the parent. He/she does NOT NEED a lawyer to do this ... just gather proof (e.g. an affidavit from the "child", or testimony from him/her), and bring it into the court. File a claim, and for less money than most monthly support orders cost, you have yourself a judgement. It may even eliminate the arrears (you never know until you try).

Another situation is the parent who loses employment temporarily. He/she can petition the court (again, you don't NEED a lawyer, although in this case it might be of benefit) for a temporary reduction in the amount of the support order. Believe me - I've seen it! Many times. It is possible. Definitely NOT guaranteed, but possible. BUT you have to be proactive. Ask around. Go to your local legal aid office for some advice. It is out there, but it won't be handed to you - you need to "dig" for it.

I agree some non-custodial parents get the raw end of the deal, but FAR FAR many more shirk their financial (and sometimes emotional) responsibilities where their children are concerned. Unfortunately, these ones give the good ones a bad name.

Date: May 06, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
In a society where women can do no wrong fathers are going to suffer the most in a divorce. The end effect being Dads and their children are strangers to each other. While this govenment approved isolation is being accepted another agency is spending money promoting the family, what do they want?

I feel that it is necessary for divorce lawyers to write divorce agreements that eliminate the grey areas and clearly define the formula for calculating the amount of support to be paid. These agreements should place the onus on the "custodial" parent to prove the elgibility of the children rather than "dad" trying to prove that the child is not.

At present the only recourse is to go before the court to have an order adjusted, a process that if iniated by the noncustodial parent will at least fail and worst be made worse. Whereas uf the custodial parent seeks a change it is granted or even approved upon.

Finaly if the "media" is going to talk about "Dead Beat Dads" they should give equal space to "Merciless Mothers" who fail to honour their commitment.

Thanks for the space & sorry about the spelling.
JC

Date: May 06, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Being the new wife of a divorced dad I can certainly say that the dads often get the raw end of the deal. They are expected to give up everything for the children but the mothers are not encouraged or expected to do anything. I have seen many cases where the mothers sit back expecting the dad to do everything while they do nothing to improve their own situation or contribute to the upbringing of the kids. Information on the children's school, medical and social lives must be obtained directly from those sources as the mothers feel it is no longer to share the information where the father doesn't lives in the home.

Date: May 06, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I have been faithfully paying child support to my ex for 7 years for 3 children. I am not going to rant and rave about the $1600 a month I pay because it won't do any good. The message from the courts, ex-wives and FMEP is to shut up and pay, you are just a bank machine to us.

Date: May 06, 2001
Name: Steve Schneider

Comments:
Divorced fathers in Canada are unjustly targeted and labelled by the very system that is put in place to protect us and maintain our well-being. Yes, there are fathers out there that abuse the system but I have a hard time completely blaming them from the fear of becoming another statistic of this crude and grossly outdated issue in Canada's court system. Many men struggle daily to discover and maintain a lifestyle full of hardship due to unfair financial burdens. Why is it so easy for the Government to adjust levels of Employment Insurance, Income Tax, Minimum Wages, and other fundamentally important issues to Canadians and yet they cannot fairly and equally adjust and maintain the support levels imposed on individuals after a divorce? Personally, I find it immoral and illogical for a court system to ignore the hardships that they place on so many men in this country.

Date: May 05, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
My ex-husband is a deadbeat dad but not because he has failed to make child support payments. He is a deadbeat dad because he has failed to be a father to his children. Countless times he would make arrangements to do something with his children but would not show up, or when he did show up he would be late and under the influence of alcohol. Now that his children are young adults they despise him for the person he is. Neither of these children have any desire to get married - not because they do not believe in the institution of marriage, but because they do not want him to walk them down the aisle nor do they want him at their wedding. How sad. He is truly a deadbeat dad. Monthly support payments are worth nothing without a loving, caring, supportive father.

Date: May 05, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I think it is absolutely sick the way that the "justice" system works - the laws only take into account how the women should live - they are not looking after the best interests of the children at all. I can think of countless cases where the women is the one who runs off to sleep with everyone under the sun and basically 'cleans out' the husband...and still they are allowed custody of the children. These children go to school dirty, hungry, in ripped up clothing, while Mom flaunts around town all dolled up. At the very least, when women are awarded support payments from the father, a minimum of 1/2 should have to be placed into an RESP for the children's future education, and the rest the woman should have to show proof of food and clothing purchases. The dad gets shafted time after time, and no one challenges the riduculous legal system, which continues to punish the father, simply for fathering these children. Why on earth should a woman who defies her marriage vows and cheats on her husband, then be allowed custody of her children....just so she can raise some more warped individuals ?? Bottom line - The so-called justice system in Canada is in need of a major re-working - it sickens me ! I would love to see men's groups get together and petition governments for fairer treatment - and I would support them 150% !! It made me ill to read the horrible stories of injustice to fathers in your recent issue.

Date: May 04, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Four years ago, my ex-wife took my children from their home, moved them to another community against my will and then managed to get a court order giving her sole custody. She has refused to take 50% of the matrimonial property and by failing to settle has encumbered the assets, thus preventing me from using my share as security. My business is now in ruins. I was the stay-at-home parent and house builder for the years of our marriage, providing daily care and home-schooling for my children. I have no marketable skills and have managed to find only part-time employment. During the marriage her income was six times mine. My second wife has only a widow's pension and we are struggling to raise our son and avoid the welfare roles. My ex-wife's total family income is now in the $130,000 range while mine is under $25,000. She lives in a community where the cost of living is 60% of what I face. My $400 per month in child support allows her to take European vacations (without the children) while she complains that she and the children are struggling to survive.

The laws surrounding divorce, child-custody and child-support need desperately to be re-examined. The hardships that divorced fathers and their children face must be addressed. There are costly implications for all Canadians in terms of the well being of children, the mental health of fathers, the loss of productivity and costs associated with welfare, education and the justice system.

Date: May 03, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I am a woman, a wife, a step-mom and 99.9% of the time I find myself siding with the divorced father. I know two women who seem to think it is all about money and so what if they were the ones that wanted out of the marriage, but still kept the house, car and kids while he got the debts!

How come we never hear about the exwives that do not follow the court order? You know, that "legal" piece of paper that was the outcome of the divorce and custody battle that was agreed to in court. Howcome it is always a fight for the "joint custodial father" to receive report cards, shcool pictures, medical reports, and information so that he can be involved in sports activities? When is the exwife going to be made to follow the "legal" court order involving the children and their father? How come the law never enforces that the mother follow what she has agreed to in court?

For the 13 years that we have been together, it has been a constant fight for every school report card and picture, medical report, and information regarding their sports activities. Their mother, who "would never try to hamper the relationship with their father", has tried 3 times to gain sole custody and legally change the childrens name to her remarried name.

There are court orders stating that my husband is entitled to any and all information regarding the children and that he shares joint custody with their mother. However, even legal letters to the parties involved in reporting this information to him are ignored because the exwife steps in and tells the parties that they do not have to follow the order and that she will provide the information to the childrens father. Obviously this does not happen. The children have been hurt and taken to the hospital and he has not advised until 2 weeks later when we was to visit the children! They are told by their mother that "What happens in this house does not concern your father."

We pay over $500.00 a month per child in support and we pay for their air fare to come and visit us in the summer since we do not live in the same city. We also pay half of their medical and dental as required, and half of the expense for extra curricular activities. Don't get me wrong, I agree with paying these things because the children are part of our family and my husband's biological children. I'm tired of the everlasting fight to try and stay involved when you are stopped at every turn. The real kicker is that even while they are with us for the summer, the law states that we still have to send support payments for those two months. Support to whom? We have the children!

The exwives and the law seem to think the whole deal is just all about money. What ever happened to the welfare of the children and acting in their best interest? I think the changes to the wording in the custody act may just as well stay shelved; no one enforces that the mother follow the rules anyway. But just let that father miss one support payment because he is out of work for 2 months!

By the way Dad's.. did you know that you can get the payment tables regarding your income and child support payments on the internet? At least if you look at them, you can be prepared.

Date: May 02, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
One friend of mine, a divorced father, not only had to swallow having his childrens' names changed their new step-father's name but also had his unemployment insurance benefits garnisheed. And I mean 100% of his unemployment benefits. So much for his own apartment. He was forced to move back to his mother's house 200 miles away from his kids. I also work in an income tax office and some of the stories we hear are outrageous. We see what some men are earning compared to what they are paying. Sometimes it is to the point of ridiculous.

Date: May 02, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I am in the middle of a divorce and can not believe the injustices I am suffering. Not only does 20% of my take home pay go to child support, but I also contribute to 80% of her childcare expenses (which is another 10% of my take home pay) so she can work part-time. If this wasn't enough, I also pay her $1000 in spousal support because at the time of our separation she was only working part-time! We were married for 3 years and she worked full-time before we met, and continued to work full-time until our daughter was born. You see, because I agreed that she could work part-time UNTIL adequate full-time care was found, I am being held responsible to support her. Unfortunately, we split and she has now decided that she doesn't want to work full-time. Well... either do I but the difference is, I don't have a judge forcing someone else to pay me while I sit home! Once the tax relief for me is factored in on the spousal support, she is still getting 60% of my TAKE HOME pay. She also gets to keep 100% of her earnings from part-time employment, gets a child tax credit of $177 per month and enjoys the tax relief of claiming our daughter as her spousal equivilent at the end of
the year! With laws like this, no smart man will ever marry. A marriage contract can't even protect you. A judge has the authority to over-rule and decide if it's "fair" or not. I'll tell you what's fair- honour an agreement that was willingly entered into by 2 adults at a time when they were both thinking clearly and able to get legal advice. If no agreement is in place- 50/50
custody, 50/50 on child care costs, 50/50 on REAL child support costs, 50/50 on assets aquired during the marriage,and 50/50 on debt aquired during the marriage. Spousal support is ridiculous. No one should be forced to provide support for another adult.

Date: May 02, 2001
Name:

Comments:
My son has twin girls by his ex-girlfriend. He pays child support every month yet has to fight tooth and nail to see them. He gets signed documents with access rights but the Mother defies it every time. Each time he has to take it back through the lenghtly court system. He has taken it as far as he can afford to and again is denied access. The system failed him time and time again. She gets legal aid and doesn't care how often it gets to court. She alienates the children from their father, doesn't allow them to call him Dad and tells them nightmare stories about him, the children are frightened and confused. He lives on a shoestring now trying to pay his lawyer bill and support. He's very stressed out and doesn't know where to turn anymore. Are there any online support groups he could join? Is there anyone who can help him? Our family is suffering, we love the children dearly and don't know how to deal with this situation any more. Help!

Date: May 02, 2001
Name: lillian mcconomy

Comments:
In response to your article "Myth of the Deadbeat Dad", I would like to add that this is a prime example of discrimination against our own. If you are a Canadian you don't have a chance in our country. You can come to Canada from another country as an immigrant, Immigration Canada would never know how many kids were fathered in the country they came from, and Canada hands out eveyrthing possible for a new start in our wonderful democratic society. Heaven forbid, you should be a Canadian citizen, the government is right in your personal life, already deciding who will be persecuted because you fathered a child and with a turn of events, could not continue to support a lifestyle supposedly born into. Discremintion at its worst is very evident in our Courts. People who defraud the puplic, seniors etc. to the tune of millions, just get a "good lawyer" and basically get away with murder. The judges in this country are appointed people who have no idea of what goes on in the real world. They sit in their ivory towers, hide from real issues. They talk about increased poverty in this country. The government creates proverty. They take away a driving license, so the "Dad" who has a job, moving, sales, etc. where a car is an absolutely necessity is no more. I see that as a denial of a basic right to earn a living no matter how meager it may be. If the "Dad" has gone on to have a second chance at a family, it is taken away by the government and judges, by creating stress and poverty to a point where it is a point of survival and another family is destroyed. Single women can live better by relying on the government instead of hanging in and trying to survive with a jobless, hopeless individual. God bless Canada and its judges. This country is becoming more of a dictatorship than a free country.

Date: May 01, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Based on personal experience, yes, fathers often get a raw deal in family court. In my case, based solely on unsubstantiated allegations of "poor parenting skills" I have been denied not only access but any contact whatsoever with my now 13-year old daughter for the last 5 years. All I am allowed to do is send support cheques to the F.R.O.
The judge who made this decision is currently in a bit of hot water for ludicrous rulings he has made recently in criminal court.

Date: May 01, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
THIS IS MY SECOND COMMENT BUT UNTIL I READ THE HONESTY OF OTHERS I FELT I COULD NOT BE TOTALLY OPEN ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED TO US .I CRIED AND BEGGED LAWYERS AND GOVERMENT OFFICIALS FOR HELP . I SAVED EVERY SCRAP OF PAPER ,I HAD ALWAYS BELIEVED IN THE SYSTEM UP UNTIL THIS HAPPENED.
WHEN I KNEW I WAS GOING TO LOSE OUR MODEST 50,000 DOLLAR HOME I OPENED MY HEART AND PERSONAL LIFE TO HIGHLY PAID LAWERS THAT HAD NO CONCEPT OF POOR OR LIVING WITHOUT FOOD TO PAY CHILD SUPPORT.
I HAD RAISED MY CHILDREN MYSELF IN NOVA SCOTIA AND HAD LOTS OF EMOTIONAL AID AS A SINGLE PARENT . I WORKED AND THERE IS NO CHILD SUPPORT FROM DECEASED PARENTS .MY CHILDREN WENT WITHOUT WE WERE POOR I DID NOT GET GOVERMENT AID.
THEN I MARRIED A GOOD MAN THAT MY GROWN CHILDREN ADORE MY GRANDCHILREN HAVE HAD HIM FOR EIGHT YEARS AND LOVE HIM DEARLY .BUT HIS CHILDREN ARE NOT HERE THE COURTS HAVE HAD CONTROL OF THEIR BEST INTERESTS. THEY WEREN'T HERE WHEN HE WAS SICK OR WHEN WE LOST OUR HOME OR WHEN THEY PLACED A 20,000 JUDGEMENT AGAINST US.
THEY HAVE PROBABLY NOTICED THAT WE FORGET BIRTHDAYS ,BECAUSE THEIR GIFTS STAYED HERE UNTIL I FINALLY STOPPED BUYING AND DONATED THEM TO CHILDREN THAT HAD NOTHING.
THEY ARE FABULOUS KIDS ,HONOUR STUDENTS,ATHLETIC
AND THEY HAVE LOST A LIFETIME WITH THEIR DAD.YET THE CHILD SUPPORT IS STILL SENT ,NOT MUCH ANYMORE THERE DAD HAS LOST HIS SMILE, HES AGED A LOT SINCE HE BECAME A DISHWASHER,HE DRIVES A WRECK THAT THEY ARE ASHAMED OF A FAR CRY FROM THE NEW VECHILES THEY GREW UP WITH.
I FEEL TRAPPED NOTHING I DID OR OFFERED MADE ANY DIFFERANCE.I HAVE ALWAYS WORKED . THERE ARE WAYS OF TRACKING PEOPLE AND BEING FAIR AS WELL TO ALL PARTIES .ALLOW CANADIAN PEOPLE TO HAVE A EQUAL SAY IN HOW THESE GUIDELINES ARE FORMED AND EXECUTED.STOP ALLOWING THE CHILDREN TO BECOME A NEW TYPE OF VICTIM .WE'LL BE RAISING A SOCIETY OF MALE BASHERS. BUY THE WAY HOW MANY OF YOU KNOW THAT SOME DEADBEAT DAD'S ARE WOMEN .IN TO-DAYS WORLD WE WANT EQUALITY, BUT DO WE FORGET WHEN WE USE NASTY NAME CALLING .I GREW UP IN A WORLD WHERE WE ARE ALL CREATED EQUAL.

Date: May 01, 2001
Name: amita sirohi

Comments:
Dear Editor

The article on "The truthh about deadbeat Dads" is wonderful. I would like to say that lot of people do not want to pay alimony to wife & in some case their own child. The law needs to be strict with these smart people. But there are people who inspite of a little bad life continue taking care of wife & kids by keeping in marriage at least for the sake of the child & sometimes things do improve in marriage too. It takes little more work & adjustments to personalities & taking care of what the other person likes & dislikes.

Thank you Readers Digest for interesting articles which keep us informed as well as aware of the society we live in.

amita sirohi

Date: May 01, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I agree with the article on "Deadbeat" dads, it is
unfair to label all with one brush. Often times we
see the Mother has a new husband or boyfriend who is also supporting the children while the father is living on one income and trying to support two families. I believe they do not fairly take into consideration the incomes of both families or the change in circumstances. I have seen the impact of what the Maintenance enforcement Agency has done to families, I believe they need to take some of the power away from this Agency, they do not listen to the "paying" parent, as far as they are concerned you pay regardless of your circumstances. If you are unable to make payments due to unforseen circumstances, you are also unable to hire a lawyer to fight for you, this is a 'catch 22' situation, which alot of parents are in. This agency has the power to seize your home,
up to 70% of your income without even notifying you of this.
My husband paid for years, I was the only one working as he had back problems with no Insurance,
so I was the one paying to support his family as well as our own, we would gladly have had his children live with us and support them fully but the court system in most cases favors the Mother even if she has no income. When there are children involved it is the responsibility of both parents to support their children, but from what I have seen in most cases it is the father who provides the support as well as the health care etc.

Date: May 01, 2001
Name: Stephen

Comments:
I would like to comment on your article concerning deadbeat parents. This article is one of the very few articles that’s willing to dispel the myths of divorce concerning deadbeat parents. Generally the media chooses to print articles that displays divorced dads as the demons of divorce, (a far cry from the truth) because it draws more attention and sells more papers. The Canadian Government in their attempt to rectify problems that had occurred in the past has managed to secure the taxes they have lost by implementing a law that continues the politically correct and publicly pleasing version of divorce.

There are no winners in divorce, and no law can even try to bring back the life style that the family once enjoyed, yet the government has manage to destroy the life of the supporting parent by recapturing lost taxes, creating more devastation and hardship for both parties. It fails to look at the responsibilities of both parents to ensure a good life for the children, seeking to penalize the supporting income parent to a life style that it is measured by their standard of living guides as below the poverty line.

Date: May 01, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
In this article , what kind of situation did the faher leave his family. Was he abusive??? or was he the perfect father? Drunk, alot of these guys have money for beer etc. but food for forget it....Many quit their jobs out of spite...I'll show her....and all he is showing poor judgement. There is not enough information in your article to base a oppinion . On one side it look perfect ,but was it really..?...If the suicide occured it probably would have anyway , and he may have been crazy enough to take his kids with him...!

Date: May 01, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I have raised all three of my children without any help financially or physically. Both fathers got away scott free without any financial burden as the courts rarely enforced court orders in the late 70s, and 80s. My first husband never once sent a Xmas card or acknowledged his children (2) on their birthdays or school achievements. My second husband got out of support payments by pleading with the Alberta judge that granted his divorce, to wave a support order made against him by an ON judge. After we parted, he never helped me with any financial assistance, laughing all the way to the bank. He had three children and never paid one dime towards their up-bringing. I personally are glad that men like this are forced to take some of the financial obligation that comes with the passion of making babies.

Date: May 01, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
After reviewing the long list of comments from fathers like me who have been exploited by our ex-wives with the help of the government, it is clear that our plight is hopeless. I have paid almost $100,000 in legal fees over the past 4 years, and in that time I have lost most of my life savings to my ex-wife, I have had no access to my children for 4 years, and out of the $7600 I take home each month, I pay $6000 in support, and have to live off the remaining $1600. At the same time, my ex-wife resigned from a $65,000 per year job, bought a $700,000 house (while I only own half of a smaller $500,000 house), leased a 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee, and installed a $30,000 swimming pool in her back yard. Also, I have been suffering extreme depression partly due to my financial losses, but mostly due to the loss of my children, who I think about every single day. I have been paying excessive amounts with no interruption from the first day of our separation. My litigation is continuing in the hopes that somewhere out there I will find a judge who demonstrates an understanding of the simple basics of right and wrong, but I hold out little hope. Instead of living the life of a queen, my ex-wife should be put in jail for how she has destroyed my life, and deprived my children of a loving, caring father. It boggles my mind that there is nothing being done about this.

Date: April 30, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I think all parties involved in divorce usually get a 'raw deal'. Child support isn't the only issue, either. My ex-husband pays child support, BUT, he calls me a whore to the children, and refuses to speak to me. Even when I have called him (once in the last year and a half) to discuss a serious issue with him regarding one of the children, he told me that he does not deal with trash, and that I should talk to my lawyer. After this, he continued to lambaste me with several denigrating names, in front of 2 of his 3 children. I am a professional woman who always earned a good living during our 17 year marriage, and rarely went anywhere for my own entertainment. My life was consumed with tending to my family and earning a decent living with good benefits, and I was ALWAYS faithful. I don't cruise the bars or get hammered or make a spectacle of myself now that I'm single, either. However, since he refuses to cooperate, the litigation costs are high, and I don't see why I should have to walk away from this marriage with less than half the marital assets. After almost 2 years, we have nothing in writing, and haven't even been to court. The lawyers think that as long as he pays child support, there's no problem. So who's really suffering? Certainly the children are. He must be too, because you can't be happy if you're that consumed with hatred. Unfortunately, no one can stop him from hurting everyone involved, including himself.

I wish my children were one of the 15% group who don't see their father at all. There is something to be said for that in many cases.

Date: April 30, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
My husband has been divorced since 1989. In all of that time he has never missed a support payment or an opportunity to help his kids in extra curricular activities. What has us so frosted is his ex-wife keeps harrassing him for more money all of the time.
In the divorce, they sold the family home. The proceeds were split 50/50. However, she received all of the furniture and the car. In addition he agreed that he would clear all family debts with his portion of the proceeds from the sale. His ex-wife went out and ran up the credit cards before they could be cancelled and he had to pay that extra debt. He agreed to pay her alimony so that she could go back to school and get a degree with the understanding that she would then be better equipped to help with the monetary needs of raising the children. She wasted her first two years of University and had the gall to ask him to extend his alimony. He was paying $27,000 a year already!
After she had her degree, she decided that she needed time off before looking for work and in the next 7 years she hasn't had steady employment. She claims that the stress of working makes her sick. Instead, she hires a lawyer and keeps taking my husband back to court to get more money out of him. In addition, she signs the kids up for these expensive programs, and presents my husband with the bill for 60% of the costs. We have another child living with us and he has not had the benefits that my husbands children by his first marriage have, becasue by the time he's done paying his ex child support and extras, there is very little money left. Our new family suffers while she lives high on the hog. I have had to work every year of our marriage to make ends meet. If it weren't for the extra money I bring in, my husband and I would be below the poverty line. Yet, his ex-wife has now remarried and still sues us for more money to support what she considers the childrens right to these activities.

What makes it so frustrating, is that if they were still amrried to each other, they would have to discuss what activities they could afford for the children and act accordingly. Just because they are divorced, my husband has no say and no choice since the courts have ordered him to pay for the extras. When will it ever stop? Probably never if she has her way. It isn't about the money anymore. His ex-wife is just using this as a way to make him pay for what she sees as a failure on his part to achieve the lifestyle that she wanted when she originally married him.

Date: April 30, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
About 4-5 years ago, my ex-wife denied me access to my children for over a year. I took her to court (for the third time) for visitation violation. The judge said that he did not believe in putting mothers in jail and dismissed the charges. Because my ex-wife said that the every other weekend visitation schedule was too hard on her, the judge changed my visitation to once a month. I objected and the judge's response was that I should be happy with once a month since I had gone over a year with out seeing my children and once a month was better than not seeing them again. He then raised my child support. As we left the court room, my ex-wife laughed at me and asked if I learned my lesson. Since that point in time, I have not seen my children on the monthly schedule. Since the judge said he does not believe in putting mothers in jail, I've just had to accept the fact that I will never have regular contact with my children again. By the way, I pay my child support regularly and I am not behind.

I ask that my name not be published. Should my ex-wife see this with my name, I will be "punished" with a loss of any contact with my children.

Date: April 30, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I do think Dad's get the raw end of the deal sometimes. I have a relative that has been paying his child support for his two children every since his breakup (12 years)...also alimony for his ex too. She has not let go of the bitterness and continues to manipulate him and the lawyers into providing for her means even though she has a great job and does not need the money anymore...He keeps paying rather than fighting because she uses the kids if he puts up a fight. They are in their teens now but they are very protective of their mom, so he is afraid they would stop seeing him if he stops paying for her...this has been going on for 12 years now and there does not seem to be any end in sight for him...
I blame her first and foremost, but the lawyers are right in their for pound of flesh too...
p.s. you only ever hear from the minority of any group in the media today...the "deadbeat dad" is no different in my opinion

Date: April 29, 2001
Name: Scott

Comments:
Do you think divorced fathers often get a raw deal?

There is no doubt about it. Those who comprise the domestic courts enjoy a much more luxurious/comfortable life at the expense of children/fathers. If lying was illegal or immoral, the situation might not be as bad as it is... oh, yeah. lying is immoral... But if society thought it was a negative behavior to destroy families, then, perhaps there might be some negative consequences for those who engage in such destruction... oh, but then we'd have to chastise bad lawyers and those bad mothers who profit financially from such behavior... oh, we wouldn't want to do that. Or would we?

Date: April 29, 2001
Name:

Comments:
It is nice to read something positive about NCP
fathers. However, according to NICHD only 44%
of single mothers in 1998 were employed.
That means 56% of single mothers are unemployed.
Both parents have an obligation to support their
children. If 56% are not meeting their obligation,
what does it mean to be a deadbeat parent.

Date: April 29, 2001
Name: Chuck Evans

Comments:
The issue is not child support, but child custody. Why is it that only upon the initiation of a divorce that the leagal and physical custody of a child becomes the paramount interest? Where both parents are fit during, and subsequently, after the marriage, the fundamental right to custody of your child should not be an issue, since the definition of a fit parent implies that their child's best interests are protected. A presumption of legal and equal physical custody is constitutionally appropriate. A presumption removes the leverage that one parent (usually Mom) wields in a divorce proceeding. Where both parties (and their attorneys) recognize that neither parent has leverage going into a divorce, then the multitude of problems associated with custody and family obligations is diminished, and the courtroom does not become the slaughter house that it currently is. Child support follows the child, i.e., the custodial parent. If both parents were similarly situated, then both would be more likely to encourage post-divorce familial relationships and cooperate.
Custody is the issue, but as in life, money is the driving force.

Date: April 29, 2001
Name: Don Hubin

Comments:
Thank you for this article dispelling some of the harmful myths about divorced fathers and child support. We must help our children by ensuring that they have two *real* parents--regardless of the marital status of those parents. One parent and a monthly check is no substitute.

Don Hubin

Date: April 29, 2001
Name: Barry Worrall

Comments:
The problems of separated/divorced fathers are common throughout the Western World. Honest decent men are not protected by courts but are subjected to what is reasonably called systematic persecution.

For a description of the UK situation, with many casae studies in the men's own words and statistics based on our survey, see www.c-g.org.uk especially under 'publications'.

Date: April 29, 2001
Name: Darryl Ward

Comments:
Yes, the separated father has a rough time.

He is hounded to the end of the earth to pay child support, which is often set at unrealistic levels, whilst his ex wife may live in the house that he paid for, and he is expected to continue to pay and pay and pay.

However, if he is unfairly denied any contact with his children, there is little he can do. It is little surprise that the fate of the disenfranchised father is so often depression, alcoholism and suicide.

Perhaps if we gave men the same right to be parents that we have given women to have a career, things would improve dramatically.

Date: April 28, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I have recently been involved with family court matters regarding spousal support, depite one case conference wher my ex wife was ordered to supply substantiating evidence of financial disclosure. And a pre-trial judicial meeting, where the pre-trial judge agreed that information should be supplied, a third judge (female)ignored previously stated commemts Saying " I don't care what other judges have said, here and now is all I'm concerned with". Needless to say I lost, the judge refused my request to cancel and or reduce my court ordered spousal support payment, even though my wifes earnings have increased over the last 10 years and my upcoming retirement, when my retirement income will be reduced to $1500.00 per month, and the divorce settlement necessitated the payment,upfront, of half my estimated pension earnings. Family court judges are not accountable in any way for the decisions they make, some decisions are undeniably a miscarriage of justice. SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE.

Date: April 28, 2001
Name:

Comments:
If my story is anything to go by, many fathers face enormous obstacles trying to keep in touch with their children after divorce or separation. I have hardly seen my now-teenage daughter at all in the last ten years because her mother my ex-wife has remained very bitter towards me ever since our divorce -- even though it was she who left me for a richer man! At first I had a court order for contact, but the mother would create scenes and conflict at handover-times. When I turned up to collect the poor child her mother would launch a tirade of abuse and recrimination at me, and then hug and kiss and cling to our child as though she'd never see her again. She'd start crying and wailing till they were both in tears, then say that my daughter 'didn't have to go if she didn't want to'. Soon my daughter became anxious about seeing me at all. Her mother then stopped contact. I went back to court but my ex- insisted that my daughter didn't want to see me any more and the judge, rather than stand up to her on my behalf, gave her what she asked for -- the replacement of my defined contact with voluntary contact to be arranged by the mother when she thought the time was right. Needless to say that time never came, and my daughter has hardly seen me since. I write to her and send her presents and money but she replies very infrequently and adresses me like a nuisance and a stranger.

Date: April 28, 2001
Name: Robert Whiston

Comments:
Well done Readers Digest.
At last the truth is seeping out.
So called "dead beat dads" are usually unemployed, disabled or in poor health.
Figures compiled by the British Gov'ts own dept in Whitehall (Table G2.07 amd G2.08) clearly indcate the true situation - but no minister will refer to them. Why ?
The 30% so-called dead beat dads are the same 30% who are unemployed. Is it any wonder that Gov't says 30% of fathers don't pay regularly when they distort the true picture ?
Further analysis shows that even those dead beat dads still sacrifice their own poor living standards by providing, intermitently, small amounts of money when they can least afford it(Uni of York interim report on non-resident fathers, 1997). Hardly the behaviour or conduct of an uncaring father.
Yours sincerely,
Robert Whiston
Chaimran, ManKind
Berkley Sq
London (ManKind is a men's civil right charity)

Date: April 28, 2001
Name: Gary

Comments:
I think you hit the nail on the head when you brought up "What happens after the break-up of the family? Eighty-seven percent of children end up living solely with their mothers after a parental separation (only 7 percent live with their fathers)."

The problems stemming from the breakdown of the family are intentionallly caused by judges when they order custody of the children to single mothers. Child support collection is minor in comparison to all the social disorders that result from the millions of single mother homes.

Judges are to blame. When a man starts a family, he should at least have the right and responsibility to support and raise his children even if the relationship between him and his wife deteriorate. Every child should have the constitutional right to a sociological father, even if he is not the child's biological father.

Date: April 28, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
My son is in the middle of a marriage break-up. They have yet to go to the courts. We have been encouraging him to make the whole arrangement legal so that he can have some stability. Currently, he works full time, and his cheques are deposited directly to their joint account. His ex has total access to their joint bank account. She drives the leased car which they leased about 8 months ago. She moved to a different city to live with her mother. Leaving my son whatever he can scrape to-gether to pay bus fare to get to the other city to visit his kids on the week-end. She calls him dead-beat when he didn't show up one week-end. She also has most of the community convinced that he's not giving her anything!!!!! How much worse can it get. My son has no furniture, no vehicle, and is living with his sister so that he's not on the street. All because, he says he's trying to be fair and not make it too hard on the kids. When he mentioned giving up the car his ex told him to hold off and then sent post-dated cheques from their bank account to cover the payments saying that she "needed" a car. He is feeling so guilty about the break-up that he'll do anything if he thinks its for the good of the kids. I don't know how long this can last. But she ran up huge debts during the three years they were married, then quit her job so that now she isn't eligible for unemployment or maternity benefits. He is liable for her share of the rent on the apartment she and her mother just rented, the debts accumulated on her credit cards, the car lease and the support of the kids. He's willing to do whatever it takes but in the meantime he's malnourished and homeless while his wife drives a new car and is now living better than she was before the breakup. Is there a way out? It looks like the courts might even make an impossible situation even worse.

Date: April 27, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
As a women I asked - - - How much do we really think children cost? Do married men pay their child $1,000 or more each month as support. It seems that financially a wife and child would do much better by divorcing the dad. In a family you only spend what you can afford, for example maybe little Johnny can't play hockey because the family's income is too small. But if mom and dad are divorced the attitude is he better had the best life he can with all the bells and whistle, where dad and his money. I guess i'm saying we need to put the emphasis on parenting not financial gain.

Date: April 27, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I don't think divorced men in this country often get a raw deal, I KNOW THEY DO. I am a women, an "ex-wife" with children and am now married to a man who's children live with us.Unfortunately I have seen this unfairness. There are two sets of rules in this Country for mothers and fathers and the loseres are always the children. Who says children should be with only one parent, the mother. In our situation, my children have an ongoing relationship with both parents and have grown up secure and stable. One child lives with his dad full time and we've worked out support ourselves, and have never fought over the kids or made them feel guilty for wanting to be with mom or dad.
In my husbands case,(which is as bad as things can get during a divorce but I won't get into that) he left an abusive marriage (which is another issue that there are two sets of rules on, because he's a big guy he can take the abuse, right, but if he was abusive he'd probably be in jail) His children lived with there mother for 3 years. He immediately paid child support without a court order. She went to court for more and it was actually reduced because of his low income. In the mean time there had been no hope of reaching a property settlement so that issue went to court. Also, before this the children left there mother and came to live with us.After the trial there was no interm support payments ordered to the mother, nor has there been since. So here we are for two years with no child support being paid by their mother, not even an offer to help financially with their sports or other expenses. They are teenagers and there financial needs are of course greater than before. How many situations are there where a mother is waiting for a support order from the courts for two years? I can bet anything that a judge would not let the father walk away after a long trial and not issue an interm order regarding child support.I must also mention that our income is quite low while supporting our combined family, and the mothers is earning $60,000 or more. My point is there are also "deadbeat mothers". There are responsible parents and then there are those who must be forced to support their children.
Its time to change our view of seeing this deadbeat as a man, but rather a certain type of personality.
I've been on both ends of the divorce, and I can honestly say as a mother I had all the power and law on my side and could have made my children's fathers life miserable. I could have ruined him finacially and kept the children from him. All with the law on my side. But I chose not to. There is too much room in our system for a women's revenge and destruction. Remember your children are always watching and will grow up one day and understand what they can't now.

Date: April 27, 2001
Name: Frank Verde

Comments:
Thank you for writing the myth of the deadbeat dad.I am a man in this situation and all I can say is enough is enough!It is time for us men to stand up and demand our equality which is supposed to be guarenteed to us by something called "The Charter of Rights and Freedoms."We are in the process of starting an action group here locally,and I encourage men across the country to do the same. One of the ideas discussed at a meeting was a class action lawsuit.Maybe if the government is sued for what they made the most important thing in this whole mess , they might admit they have made a grave mistake.United we stand, divided we will not be heard. frank verde

Date: April 26, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
After reading most of the responses, it appears to me that the government keeps shooting itself in the foot (as usual). In its infinite wisdom and praiseworthy attempt to reduce welfare payments, it is driving taxpaying citizens (mostly men) into bankruptcy, suicide and income stabilization themselves!
Between the powerhungry feminists (golddiggers) and greedy money grubbing lawyers, I very much doubt that Maintenance Enforcement pays for itself. It seems to be a malignant disease spreading over the nation. You've probably noticed that bureaucracies NEVER reduce themselves; they keep growing in size and power (and expense).
It is disappointing to see that marriage is becoming a negative option due to the cost of divorce. It is apparent that divorce is a cash-cow for lawyers and drives a high percentage of the court system. Since marriage was originally intended to benefit children, it is obvious that divorce benefits only the legal system. Marriage can be expensive or inexpensive BUT divorce is utter luxury for lawyers. I don't know how they can sleep at night!
As two divorces have utterly ruined me, sucking my entire lifesavings and leaving me in such deep debt that I will never see daylight, I almost feel a duty to warn young men about the inherent dangers awaiting them. I haven't seen a marriage yet that appears worth the paper the certificate was printed on.
Do you suppose that all the people who have responded to this article can make any difference? Have there been any suggestions which are likely to ever be implemented? My guess is that until all disenfranchised dads stand up and stop being pushed around, the last option left for the deadbeats is to take their own lives. Until the government gets the message that it has caused the formation of a Nazi-like govern(mental) agency, it will only get worse!

Date: April 26, 2001
Name: Don

Comments:
I am a payor of child support through FMEP. I strongly agree that amounts payable should be calculated on net not gross income. As for how much an individual is deemed able to afford to pay,I would like to see how this is determined. The notion that your gross income is XXX therefore you must pay XXX is beyond me.
Also, since my income is based solely on commision sales, my take-home pay can vary from month to month (well below average for the past year). This makes an inflexable system even more frustrating.
(I've just returned to this writing after viewing some of the other responses before I sent mine. I must say that I am amazed at the volume and range of responses. It makes my situation pale to most by the sounds of it.) I thank those who posted phone and web-site contacts and encourage all who wish to seek change or just have their voices heard to do so. I just hope for fairness and equality in these custodial and maintenance matters.

Date: April 26, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Having 4 sons I worry about their furture relationships and how fair will the system be for them if anything happens. I have also been through a divorce. My ex husband threatened to file for bankrupsy if I tried to get child support. I tried, he filed and now I'm the nasty ex wife who caused him to go bankrupt (He wasn't paying me anything so I didn't cause his debt, but that's not the story he is telling). The way I see it there is always two sides to every story.

Date: April 26, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I currently live in this very situation except I am the single mom who is unable to get any child support. I have been in constant contact with Maintenance Enforcement to no avail. Even when I do find out where my ex is they do not pursue it until he has again left the province. My frustration runs deep on this issue. A question from my point of view is, How many single Moms have killed themselves because the situation is hopeless? I myself have considered it on several occasions.

When ordered by the courts 8 years ago to pay a reasonable amount of money for child support, he immediately quit his job and laughed in my face that he was going to leave town. Which he promptly did after selling off all my son's toys and possessions. Yes, I am bitter. My son, has not only gone without a fatherly influence in his life for the last 8 years but he has also had to go without many things that other kids take for granted. I have done my very best with working two jobs from time to time to try to make ends meet, but even with that I find myself in debt, which will take me years to dig myself out of. My son, would like to continue into secondary education, but.....there is no money for it except through student loans. As I know that his father's income was quite comfortable, I hope the abandonment and the failure to help support his only son haunts him till the end of his days.

Date: April 26, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I think it is a such an injustice to so many "divorced dads" the way they are treated in the judicial system. The women involved should be ashamed of themselves expecting to be "taken care of" forever. The real tragedy is the impact this has on the children. They grow up to believe that they also are entitled to this way of life. I believe in fairness for all. I do not believe that a man, or woman, should pay because a relationship is over. Certainly a huge step back for women's independence!!!!

Date: April 26, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Thank you Readers Digest and Donna Laframboise.

It's about time some one had the courage to investigate and write a story on this topic.

I am not a divorcee, but rather I am quite happily married with 3 beautiful children.

I have seen plenty of friends and acquaintances ruined because of silly court decisions.

I hope this story knocks some common sense into the judges and law makers of this country before anyone else is driven to the point that JIM was.

Sincerely,

WJK

Date: April 26, 2001
Name: Deborah Barton

Comments:
When I read your article on deadbeat dads I was horrified at the amount of money some men were required to pay for child support. I think that an equitable arrangement could be made by asking each partner to contribute a percentage of their salary to the support of their children. For example each spouse could be required to contribute 10 - 25 percent of their NET income toward child support depending on the number or chldren (it would have to be calculated). This would work out for both parties. If a man earned 100,000 NET income then his support should be 20%. $20,000 dollars, while is his ex-spouse earned 30,000 their contribution would be 6,000. There could be special arrangements set up for divided custody,and special costs like hockey, proms, school supplies etc. Dividing those events by percentage or by the greater income. In no way do I feel that the non-custodial parent should have to give up their lives (as described in your article) for outrageous payments. Let's be fair about this? This, of course, does not apply to prenuptial agreements or spouses of either se who have millions and don't want to support their families. But for the average working parents, I think this is a fair solution.

Date: April 25, 2001
Name: John Feriozzo

Comments:
I propose that the following guidelines be made into law in cases of marital breakdown where young children are involved.
1)both parents share equally in all decisions
reguarding education health and religion and all
aspects of child welfare.
2)equal access to the children based around work
schedules.
3)child support should only be paid in accordance with federal support guidelines based on the differance between both parents income.
I feel this would lead to a decrease in the number
of marital breakdowns.

Date: April 25, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Yes, I think some fathers get the short end of the stick for several reasons. In my divorce, the judge didn't seem to care that my ex quit her job two weeks before we split. Or the fact that I worked close to four hundred hours last year before the overtime was eliminated. Spousal support was "negotiated" on my gross earnings with the assumption that I could continue to work those long days indefinetly.
Then of course, the lawyers see how big the pie is and know that if they can get us fighting over even the tiniest issue, their cut gets bigger. I guess i'm a cynic but I have spent $7300 to date in lawyer fees. I have no idea how much my ex spouse has spent.
I have no problem being fair with child support for three children. I am their father and have always accepted the responsibility that that brings and I have liberal access to my children. The problem I have is the unreasonable court order for spousal support and the fact that I had to pay her a large share of my company pension plan. I have to wait until I retire to collect any of it, but she got $30,000 up front.

Date: April 25, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I too, have heard about "deadbeat dads" who have to make outrageous payments to their wives and children, due to an overzealous judge and I can empathize with their situation. This particular article has examined one side of a situation which has occurred because there are true "deadbeat dads" in this world who have to be brought to task to support their families. Admittedly, there are dads who do fulfill their responsibilities, but there also are a large number who do not.

I have been on the other side of the fence. I am an ex-wife of a "deadbeat dad" who decided at forty to pursue life with a younger woman with no children. Through the courts, a monthly payment schedule was decreed, though the decision was not enforced at the time. Thus,the mortgage, credit line & credit cards were not paid as agreed as they had been before the separation. Both mortgage & credit line were called in by the bank with 15 days notice to pay in full. Insufficient funds were being provided by the husband & father in question to support his two teenaged children. The Family Maintenance Enforcement Program had to be utilized to ensure financial security for the two teens, who also suffered emotionally through this crisis, and still suffer long past their teen years. The financial hardship caused by the true "deadbeat dads" is only the tip of the iceberg to the emotional scars that these children bear for the rest of their lives. Most children of divorced parents will recover sufficiently through counselling and maturity of later years to live healthy and happy lifestyles, although their growing up years, which should have been happy and carefree have been marred by the inconsiderate actions of an errant parent. Separation and divorce is not the recipe for a happy and healthy childhood. Parents must weigh their decisions very carefully before embarking on a new life without their spouse and/or children. The outcome is most certainly final and often very hurtful to the family unit.

Date: April 25, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
No, at least not from what I have observed of what my sister and her daughter, my beloved neice have been subjected to. A father who left the country thinking this absolved him of his parental duties, this 'father' is a professor with a very good salary, who repeatedly broke his daughter's heart by not acknowledging birthdays, holidays, awards, graduations, and told her the reason he did not want her in his life was because her mother was trying to force him to make child support payments, thereby causing a painful - although not permanent - rift between mother and child.
He obviously cares far more about manipulating the mother of his child than he does about his daughter's emotional health.
A power game revolving around money -who has it - and who has to grovel for it.
It appears to me that most single mothers grovel- to the courts - to their ex-husbands - to family maintenance enforcement officers - to provide the bare neccessities for their children.
I have lived with this and it breaks my heart. I love my neice, and see her staying at home while the rest of the class goes skiing, or on a field trip which her mother can not pay for, and I know that her father has a large income, lives very well in England, has fathered a new family, and consequently wishes to avoid his responsibilities to his first Canadian-born child.
Interestingly, it is not the Canadian family maintenance system, but the British courts that are finally requiring child support payments for my neice.
So, finally a small amount of the owed financial support is arriving, but the emotional damage can never be repaired.

Date: April 25, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I feel they need to also look closely at the financial situation of the father and be sure that he is able to pay his support payments and they should review the financial status of the father on a regular basis,I'm sure alot of the fathers out there do their best to suport their children but it seems our justice system is very quick to judge these dad's when they fall behind without checking his financial status and see why they suddenly become Dead Beat Dads.When a couple marries the justice dept.is not involved in what they do but let a divorce happen and children involved then they are there I beleive in alot of cases the couples involved should be allowed to come to their own terms on custody and support just as freely they entered into marriage they should be just as free to disolve it.My husband and I have been married for forty years and if we decide to end our marriage it will be our decision and not depend on the legal system to decide who gets what and why.

Date: April 24, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Ibeleive that men who dont pay get off too easily.However, I dont believe women should use their exs as cash cows.When my parents divores I learnt what poverty was, we were homeless at one point. My father was rebuilding his life,yet he had a home. I thank God that I have my education because I myself am a single mom who recieves no child support. My ex lives off his parents, is on Sosical assistance, works under the table, and hides behind a mental illness lable. The case was in the courts for a year and it has been ajourned. I can take him to court myself , later; but,If I can afford a lawer then I dont need support from him. Even fifty doolars a month would be good for an education fund.I am fustrated with the system because not enough is done about dead beat dads. Also, as a single mom who is self sufficent, I am fustrated with the system because after all the bills that I pay myself I have less money in my hand then when i was on Social Assitance.However I dont believ a man should be put into poverty ,but better him then his children. What I have learned through this whole ordeal is Get your education ,dont rely on your partners for support, and dont rely on the system to help you. By the way i love being a mom with all my heart and soul.For all the dads who are getting not giving a raw deal, stay strong, your children will figure it out. If you are in all honesty are trying your hardest let the chips fall were they may.

Date: April 24, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I am the wife of a dad that pays support for a child from a previous relationship. There is no relationship with this child as the mother moved several provinces away before it was born. The only visiting rights are in that province at the xin-laws house. We have one child together. We had a situation a few years ago where we were both unemployed and it was pretty tough to even put food on the table. We wrote a letter to Maintenance Enforcement explaining our situation and advising that although we were behind in the payments (2 months) that as soon as one of us became employed, we would take care of any arrears and become current. Within days of receiving our letter, their reply was a court order to sieze our bank account. Interesting enough, our copy of the court order was received 14 days after the bank was notified. During this time period, employment had come our way and we had issued cheques to clear up the arrears, not yet knowing about the court order. Of course, as soon as we received our copy of the court order, we made a phone call asking them to confirm whether they were going to cash the cheques or take funds from our account. We were assured that the cheques would take care of the balance and that they would cancel the attachment on our bank account. Within a day, we noticed that something was wrong when attempting to pay for gas with our bank card and finding out funds were not available. Upon discussions with our bank, we were notified that Maintenance had in fact taken funds via the court order and cashed the cheques. Another phone call to the department brought their apologies and a two week wait for them to issue a cheque to cover the amount they had so quickly taken from our account.
It didn't matter to them that three people (one a 4 year old child) would go without as long as they got theirs. Deadbeat dads? I suppose there are a few. The deadbeats, in my opinion, are the lazy people (maintenance employees,lawyers, judges) that won't take the time to look at individual cases. Just throw them all in one pile and suck em dry.

Date: April 23, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Although I have never been caught up in the legal system in any way, it never fails to amaze me how the Law profession in general (which largely influence government & the courts) designs a legal system that first & formost line their own pockets. I wonder what has caused the high rate of child poverty in this country. Is it the deadbeat dads, or the lawyers who ultimately rob socity, (mothers, fathers, & children) of a decent chance to sort of there problems in a civilized manner. Where is the leadership?

Date: April 23, 2001
Name:

Comments:
YES - "Deadbeat" Dads are getting a raw deal, and the lawyers and the courts make it very difficult for women to be fair.

My husband and I separated eleven years ago, and when it became apparent that we were not going to reconcile, I went to a lawyer to file for divorce. When we got to the issue of child support and I told the lawyer about the voluntary child support payments that we had agreed upon and which my husband had been paying, he LAUGHED at me - told me to "wake up and smell the coffee - soak the bastard for as much as you can get from him". I told him that my children were well provided for and the support I received was sufficient. He refused to take my case. I went to another lawyer who very kindly told me that based on my husband's income, he would be responsible for an amount triple to what he was currently paying - being based on his gross income rather than what he was taking home. This lawyer then explained to me that even though my husband and I had agreed on this amount and were both satisfied with it - a judge would overrule and order him to pay more. I began the process of filing for divorce without benefit of legal counsel and found that the courts are not user-friendly for laymen - we still are not divorced. Then, to beat the ridiculous law that makes payees responsible for the taxes on what they pay to their spouses, we drew up a separation agreement which stated that I would claim the payments as taxable income so that he could continue to claim them - he couldn't afford to pay them otherwise! I think the courts should keep their long, pointy noses out of support payments, as it makes it very difficult for men to maintain relationships with their children, and makes divorce more adversarial a process than it already is.

Date: April 23, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I cannot get over how close to home this hits. Every fact you wrote in this article is exactly what a friend of mine is going through . I can't believe the government just sits back and allows this to happen . In this case the ex-wife has an affair with the best friend and leaves him with a bunch of bills , no family and nothing from the household.Now his wages don't even cover his bills either. I think his only way out would be bankrupcy but his pride is too big for that . Something needs to be looked into to make much needed changes with respect to this . I would love to help out in any way I can as being a female voice that tends to go with the men on this one. If you petition or can think of other ways to better this situation I will gladly be a voice or a lending hand in this .

Date: April 22, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Certainly there are some fathers who get a raw deal when it comes to supporting their families. There are women who are just out to get everything they can from their ex and just don't care what position they leave him in.
However, I think the majority of Dads get off very easy. It is far more common to hear of the single Mom trying to raise children with no child support than hearing of the Dad being taken to the cleaners. I know of women who are supporting 2, 3, or 4 children with absolutely no support from the father. Most of them are just scraping by or have had to resort to seeking help from Churches or Welfare.

Date: April 22, 2001
Name:

Comments:
My husband and I are currently paying child support to his ex and yet his daughter still calls for money and comes for her visits with lists of things her mother has told her we should be buying her. We now only get holiday visits since they moved 900 kms away,with us paying transportation costs. This woman earns double what my husband and I earn together and gets unreported money from her other ex with whom she has made out of court arrangements with. We are required to provide day to day itineraries yet we often do not know where the child is for weeks if her mother feels like taking a break. Too often custodial parents are given total control and use this to hurt the other parent to feel like less of a parent. If the custodial parent only had to explore the other parent's concerns( such as in medical and educational needs) the children would only benefit. We give all our daughters what we can and remind them that it is what we do together that is important and make the most of our time together. No matter how far she is, my step-daughter is an important part of our family.

Date: April 22, 2001
Name: A. Hancock

Comments:
I feel the govt. has handled this situation the same way they handle everything else,no thought of improving anything, just make some decisions to take the heat off themselves for now. The govt. agency that has been set up to handle the court imposed child support payments is the poorest excuse of a help , if we as private citizens operated like them the govt. would charge us with fraud. By the way I am still married to the same wife of 42 years.

Date: April 22, 2001
Name: Earl Silverman

Comments:
Family of Men Support Society has operated a men's/father's support and crisis information line for 10 years. www.familyofmen.com
We offer peer support to men and women seeking some relief from the unrealistic demands of maintence and lack of support for child access.
We do not recieve any governament funding.
Some "DEADBOLTED DADS" stories include fathers;
-ordered to pay $1750 per month for support when his monthly net income is only $1400,
-fathers who require their drivers licence for work but are unable to work since they have lost their licence to the Maintenance Enforcment Program. They are told to pay off their debt before they can get their licence back but are unable to do so because they have no licence to generate an income,
-support payments based on unrealistic "potential income",
-a father living on student loans going to university full time ordered to pay maintenance based on an income filed two years previous,
-fathers working full time but must try to live on a monthly income of $500 because the rest is going to maintenance,
-fathers paying maintenance but still unable to see their children,
-Deadbolted Dads who are told to go back to court to change the maintenance, but have no money to pay a lawyer to do the change,
-fathers who have no reason to live.

Your reply is requested.
Earl

Date: April 22, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Yes, I think that fathers sometime do get a raw deal in a divorce, because the ex-wife is money hungry or is simply revengful. The article in your April issue about deadbeat Dads shocked me...I didn't realize that some dads would take it to the point of suicide. I'm divorced, but my ex and I are good friends (for the kids sake).

Date: April 22, 2001
Name: cheryl mclellan

Comments:
Until one is in a situation where the father has to pay support and he's automatically labeled as a deadbeat dad, one has no idea just how unjust the legal system really is.
As a woman, I used to applaud the 'womens groups' who would seek justice. But now...seeing the damage they have caused with the courts standing behind them 100%, I'm almost ashamed of being a woman.
The Canadian Government is also to blame. They encourage divorce and the poor single mom is actually better off than before.
Being better off is not bad, mind you..but the father who gets his children on visitation EVERY weekend,does Easter, Christmas, school supplies and clothing, birthday parties,vacation every summer, etc.with his children, and who also pays child support and then gets a summons saying that he is being taken back to court to pay MORE support is left destitute. With nowhere to turn to for assistance, the man is totally on his own. Once that happens, there will be no money for his day to day expenses and he'll have to move once again trying to find a cheaper apartment.
The money that he spent on his children on the weekends will be no more.
So do men really get a raw deal in divorce?
You bet they do!!!!!!!!!!!!
In the eyes of the court, these men (regardless of how great a dad they may be), are labelled as scum and the only thing they are good for is $$$$.
I think a few more woman should stand up and say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH and stop being so damn greedy and spiteful.
You're putting your ex through hell, yes. But the bottom line is your children are the ones who suffer also.
It's time to stand back and take a look at each individual case and stop lumping all dads as deadbeat dads.
WILL THE COURTS PLEASE WAKE UP?????????????

Date: April 21, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I would like to see changes to the child support
payment system. Children become the victims when
parents do not work to-wards a payment plan that
works to ensure that one parent does not suffer
financial hardship at the expense of the other.
The receiving parent should have to keep records of actual costs of expenditures for each childs
living expenses. These records should be available
to the paying parent request.

Date: April 21, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Men have it bad. Just because the courts rule in the favor of women doesn't make it right. I unfortunately know of too many women who deliberately take advantage of the generosity of the courts instead of determining approximate realistic monthly expenses. Michael's story appalled me. Why should he go for broke while she is living high on the hog and not working? Men should pay FAIR support payments based on realistic numbers...not his paycheck!

Date: April 21, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I'm currently living this same nightmare. I have had no contact with my daughter for 16 years. I faithfully paid child support until she reached the age of 18. I then sent a letter to the FRO stating that to the best of my knowledge, that she was no longer in full time attendance at school. My former wife was to provide me with school report cards & pictures of both children. That was only done 5 times in the last 12 years. The FRO sent a letter on a Friday stating I was in arrears & the following Tuesday sent another letter stating they would start to garnish my wages. I got a court order on Jan. 17 to amnend the support payments & it took many phone calls & finally the ombudsman to get the FRO to react.(The date my first paycheck was correct was March 14th). They (FRO)were quick to garnish my wages but slow to react to the court order. My ex-wife has changed the childrens' names to her new spouse's. My son will turn 18 years old this year & now they want me to pay for his post education, in addition to the child support payment. He also has not seen me for 7 years.
I don't think I should have to pay for his post secondary education since he has a partime job, will be applying for osap & his step-father works.
When does this ever end? I agree, not all dads are deadbeats & the courts seem very one sided.
Maybe it is time that these women should be brought to task.

Date: April 21, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I personally know of some and have also heard of many other fathers and ex-husbands who have been ordered by the courts to pay child and spousal support well beyond their means. The legal system is ruining not only the fathers lives but the children's lives as well. I blame most of the problems on the lawyers,who stand to make a lot of money. As well, the judges who impose these unrealistic payments must be in cahoots with the lawyers, as each and every time there is a requested change a lawyer stands to make even more money, usually two lawyers. The system is definitely flawed and is ruining too many lives. I know of others who must try to live on nothing after court ordered payments are made, just like the ones in your article.
I also know of some other cases where child support must be paid by a court order where the father had no options as to the birth of the child and had only slept with the mother on a couple of occasions when they were 15 & 16 years old. The mother had the option at the start to have an abortion and was enticed to do so. She elected to have the baby, but the father must now pay for many years for her selfish option.
The family maintenance laws are too broad and should be looked at very closely as to violations of human rights. Once caught up in this system a person's life is no longer their own.
I agree whole heartedly with the the comments in this article and agree it is high time to look at the total family maintenance program and also the taxation aspect.

Date: April 20, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
"In general, 85-91% of Canadian children... actually receive payments"...
I would like to know where these 'general' statistics were obtained, and how much in general these children actually receive.
Despite legislative changes in recent years and more diligent attempts by the courts to enforce child support payments, families headed by single mothers remain the most impoverished demographic group in Canada.
Where are their stories?

Date: April 20, 2001
Name: Kevin James Spence

Comments:
This issue has been debated to death..(meanwhile people are dieing), it is time for justice, not only for fathers but for their children. Who is in charge of the morality of the courts.

Date: April 20, 2001
Name:

Comments:
My first submission was probably too insolent to be posted so this one will be very tame!!!
The court system is completely saturated with an extremely negative attitude toward men. On divorce 20 years ago I was stripped of my home,my life savings- everything- and ordered to pay 50% of my take home pay to my ex. I worked three years to gain access to my children even while making ALL support payments. Every negative superlative must apply to this Canadian atrocity.

Date: April 20, 2001
Name: Margaret Knapp

Comments:
The Canadian courts are not dealing very well with the issue of dollars with respect to the dads who are making the support payments. How can a father whose income is depleted substantially by the payments and barely has enough money to afford basic necessities afford to hire a lawyer, or get any assistance without the necessary money to pay for the services of a professional. I heard of one judge in Ontario who told the father - "well, you can go any Friday
between 2:00 & 4:00 p.m. and get legal aid". Well, let's get serious. In most cases the gross income of these men is far in excess of what legal aid will consider - legal aid is geared to very low income persons. But, what is not factored into the equation is that in actual fact, most of these men are living in real dollars on less than what most welfare recipients receive and yet they cannot qualify for legal aid help. They are in essence stuck between a rock and a hard place. Another strong legal point which needs to be addressed and was presented briefly in Donna Laframboise's article is the legal description of who is a child and who is an adult - it seems the legal definition varies substantially in our court system and needs to be clearly defined. My perception after reading some of the emails received by Reader's Digest is that we have a very serious situation in our court system. It seems to me as a Canadian that the whole legal system is geared to helping lawyers earn a living and has nothing to do with serving the Canadian public. We are taxed at an exorbitant rate in this country to provide some of our social services and other services that government provides. We rely heavily on both our Federal Parliament and provincial governments to address issues that concern us as individual members of society. I have contacted some members of the provincial government departments in Ontario to advise them of the dialogue that is going on about this article and hopefully some of them will bring it to the attention of the legislature of Queen's Park in Ontario. I hope anyone reading this will also take the initiative to phone, email, fax or write their respective members of both the provincial and federal legislatures and get some action going to help these men.

Date: April 20, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I'm currantly going throgh a devorce. My ex-wife is asking for $1300.00 a month.My gross pay with about 10-15 hour of over time which does not happen all the time(seasonal)is about $2200.00. After taxes and insurance and other deductions, I'm left with appproximatly $200.00 per month. I then have the loan for the lawyers fees. Possibly her lawyers fees will be added on to that(roughly$4000.00)which puts me at-$450.00/month roughly. So can I claim bankruptcy "NO" cause she can contest it forcing me to pay her support and the lawyers. What am I suppose to live on for the next 17 year???? If i get a better paying jobe all she has to do is go back to the lawyers ask for more and ask to have her lawyers bill paid again. How equal is that?? Not to mention we were only married two years and have one child. But she wants me to pay for the two childeren that were from a previous relationship. Needless to say she had nothing when we meet. no furniture no nothing, now she's got everthing.I know how this men feel. The courts need to do something about beening equal in their desisions.

Date: April 19, 2001
Name: Kelechi Ejezie

Comments:
I feel that divorced dad's are getting a really rough deal. Child support assessments can be done more fairly than they are now!

Date: April 19, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I HAVE BEEN PAYING CHILD SUPPORT FOR ABOUT 10 YEARS NOW AND HAVE 7 MORE YEARS TO GO AND I HAVE CONTINUED TO BE LABELED A DEADBEAT DAD. I VERY SELDOM SEE MY CHILDREN BUT I DO KEEP IN TELEPHONE CONTACT WITH THEM ON A REGULAR BASIS AND I DO SEND IN REGULAR PAYMENTS FOR CHILD SUPPORT. I LIVE IN AN OLDER HOME AND I DRIVE AN OLD CLUNKER FOR A CAR. DOES MY NOT SEEING MY CHILDREN ON A FREQUENT BASIS MAKE ME A DEADBEAT DAD? I DON'T THINK SO. I DON'T HAVE THE BEST RELATIONSHIP WITH MY CHILDREN'S MOTHER SHE MAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR ME TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS TO SEE MY CHILDREN ON A REGULAR BASIS AND AS WELL THEY LIVE A LONG DISTANCE FROM WHERE I LIVE AND THE EXTRA COSTS FOR TRAVELLING ON TOP OF MY PAYMENTS MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR ME FINANCIALLY.

WHY DOESN'T OUR SOCIETY GO AFTER THE REAL "DEADBEAT DADS" WHO HAVE NEVER PAID A CENT AND WHO HAVE NEVER SEEN THEIR CHILDREN. THEY ARE THE REAL "DEADBEAT DADS".

Date: April 19, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I agree with your article that dads should not be penalized because of their healthy or unhealthy income. After 13 years of single motherhood myself I am now married to a man who just adores his two daughters although his divorce was very messy and unfair. He lost his home, vehicles, children and paid alimony and support faithfully. She gained everything. His X took his children to another province so the only way he can see them is by paying for airfare and taking his vacation to spend time with them.
Tell me why if after many meetings with social workers and children's lawyers, it was proven that his kids needed him and loved him just as much as the mother, he has never raised a finger in anger towards anyone, is a faithful father and gentle person but the X wife was allowed to take the kids to another province. She is the one who had an affair and wanted the marriage ended.

I strongly believe when there is a divorce that woman should have to support themselves and there should be an equal chance for the father to receive full custody. It's time the courts stopped looking upon woman as needing to be taken care of by men. For goodness sakes allow men to have a future, allow them to live a full life financially after a divorce. Definitely there should be support given for the children (at a reasonable amount per child NOT dependent on the man's income). Why should a man be penalized for life because of a divorce. The woman can get a job and support herself.
I was a single parent for the first 13 years of my childs life with no support payments or help of any kind from his father. I have been unable to locate him personally or through private investigative companies. He seems to have disappeared. My son is now 19 years old and we still have no idea where his natural father is? How often I could have used his support throughout all those years - while I held down a full time job and lived in an apartment. My son has no education money saved.

If there is anyone else I can write to help support this issue and get changes through parliament I will be happy to do so.

Date: April 19, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Reading your story about 'deadbeat Dads' just confirmed my thoughts on the subject. Every guy I know in a divorced with kids situation (where the mother has the children) are being taken advantage of! I don't understand why it's so hard for our legal system to give fathers in our counrty a fair trial when it comes to family affairs! A person charged with rape or murder is given more fair play. Men and Women alike...we all make mistakes, we all learn as we go, we all deserve to be treated like human beings. If a couple decides to divorce but can't sit down and decide what will be best for thier children in the future, is it so much to ask for a little help? There are enough poor people in this country already. I don't think it's fair of our government to create more poor people. We need to review the way we look at people and start treating eachother more the way we would like to be treated.

Date: April 19, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I am a divorced father of two sons that has in the past been repeatedly denighed visitation. My marriage ended because of me exwifes infidelity (with close relatives no less). This eventually drove me over the edge. For three years I gave up . I am back now with a new attitude, but even given the history of being denighed access, it is not within the last three years. A judge will not grant me an enforcement clause in my new agreement!! Take her to court if it happens again!!! In the mean time this costs me time and money that could be better used elsewhere. There is no price that can be put on my children so I will do what I have to but it is quite disheartening. I have decided that the best thing that I can do to help others in my position is to petition other governments to economically boycott Canada for it's unfair treatment of men. Maybe when other OPEC countries do this, then the politicians will take notice of what is going on in the real world.

Date: April 18, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I read your article with interest. Although I do have an acquaintance that is living at poverty level due to the amount of child and spousal support her is required to pay, my personal experience is unlike those mentioned. My ex-husband uses my daughter's support payments to "keep me in line". He treats his weekends with her as "his time" and that her activities (swim lessons etc) should not interfere with his weekend. Her needs or wants are not a priority. And before anyone gets it into their head that I took him to the cleaners, rest assured that he was better off when we split than he was when we married. I only wish I was financially able to walk away from his money and his cruel treatment of our child. Perhaps someday I will.

Date: April 18, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
i think most fathers get the raw deal but there are alot of fathers who don't participate in a childs life until they are older and in that instance i think Moms stay in their childs life forever even then some moms don't do that as a child of Divorce i think my sister and i went through alot as youg ladies, i hardly see my mom except in the summer and i see my dad all the time in my case i think it is unfair i think many children get put in the middle to often and makes their life 10 times worse if they are not already feeling bad about their situation.

Date: April 18, 2001
Name: Dianne Moody

Comments:
I have worked in the Banking Industry for many years and I have seen first hand,how many divorced husbands have been put into financial ruin over child support and spousal support payments. I can honestly say that I beleive the system has gone too far the other way in support of the divorced Mother and kids. I would also agree that it has nothing to do with what is needed to actually support the child, and has everything to do with revenge. I would like to add that I am also divorced with children. I ended my marraige when my kids were 17 and 21 years of age. My lawyer of course insisted that I go after everything I was entitled to. I gave his suggestion a great deal of thought and decided that what was more important to me was that I did not hurt my husband and kids any further by fighting over the finances. I signed over the matrimonial home to my husband, I left him his investments ( I took whatever was in my name) and I did not ask for support in any way. I knew I could support myself so why destroy the man. I continue to support both my children financially and so does my ex husband. As a result, my children seem to have adjusted to the situation much better than I would have thought, and my ex husband and I still have a friendly relationship. I believe that the lesson I have taught my children in all of this, is this. Even if a marraige doesn't work out, it is still possible to treat each other with respect,dignity, fairness and honour. That was what was most important to me, not money. I responded to your survey also to let people know that not all women are out to get the men either. There are decent people everywhere.

Date: April 18, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I am a so call deadbeat dad,I also was force into bankrupcy,I feel that some womens are not assuming enough responsabilities when it come to finding work to help providing for the children . There is no way of knowing where the money goes,will it benefit the children or the mother who is to well off,why go to work .

Date: April 17, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
"It's time our courts, our laws and our bureaucracies started treating divorced men like the full-fledged parents their children deserve."
I witnessed my own brothers near collapse when the custody of his children was awarded to his ex-wife, a very loving, yet incompetent mother. I observed him struggle to make up child support payments to her while having his license (and livelihood) held by the bureaucracies responsible for ensuring that she receive her 'rightful' monies. I was there when he collected his children off of the street outside of their mother's house when they called because 'mom's' boyfriend put her head through the wall. I explained to them the laws that would keep them from their dad and with their mother until they reached an age that the courts would deem acceptable for their own decision making. A dead beat dad? I think not.
On the other hand, my own experience as a divorced mom of four children is different. A father that very occasionally contributed small amounts of money toward his children, and then only after verbally abusing or threatening death. Money his power and his punishment for daring to leave. A plastic bag with 64.00 in nickels, dimes and pennies...bankrupcy for me, borrowing the money the children made, eating rice and beans. A dead beat dad with a cocaine nose and doped brain. A dead beat dad with joint custody. A dead beat dad who has no sense of responsibility, or interest in seeing his children...but wait, listen to him, and he will tell you it is all my fault, that I am to blame for this, and any problems that he has. Why not use the bureaucracy to receive the monies that my children are entitled to? Because I don't believe the laws are capable of protecting me from a crazy man. I believe his death threats.
Dead beat dads? I don't know.
"It's time our courts, our laws and our bureaucracies started treating divorced men like the full-fledged parents their children deserve."
Since the courts, laws and bureaucracies are so involved in the divorce process, perhaps it is time that they did a better job of evaluating both parents before they set custody and demand child support.

Date: April 17, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Your article of Apr 2001, although satisfying because it captured many of the frustrations that I have experienced over the years, only reflects part of the story. It has been my experience that most divorces are due to an imbalance of power in the relationship. The current statutes perpetuate this imbalance in favour of the custodial parent and render the non-custodial parent's desire to positively affect their children more difficult.

For instance, it is my desire to develop my children into mature adults who respect others and who take responsibilitiy for their own actions and decisions. Part of this responsibility is for them to determine what they wish to do with their lives. By forcing me to pay child support until they are finished post secondary education (to someone who has often referred to me as a 'bank account' and who has no obligation to justify to me how the money is spent) removes my ability to enter into a negotiated agreement or debate with them regarding further education and life choices. An unforeseen consequence of which is that they become adults who believe that 'life' owes them something automatically and that they take this form of support for granted. This opportunity exists between children and parents in marriages unaffected by divorce, yet seems to be 'automatically' removed from divorced parents, especially non-custodial parents.

Some of the changes proposed in the article are laudable, namely to have a termination date for paying support. Other suggestions could include greater attention given to costs incurred by the non-custodial parent in order to exercise access.

I wish that there had been a way to prevent my wife from removing my children from the city I live in and making my access very difficult (it's six hours away when the 401 isn't busy...), and that the support amount took into account this fact and the fact that I must stay in hotels and pay for all their clothing and other incidentals. She refuses to let the children visit with anything but the clothes on their backs. What scares me from a 'person development' perspective is that my kids may believe that this form of treatment is OK, when, in my opinion, it is not. But even worse, is the fear that as I age (just 38 now)), compounded with the frustrations that I feel towards the Justice System, the Reponsibility Office and that my relationship with the kids is wholly dependent on me, with no (or very little) encouragement to the kids from their mother, that I simply give up and become another statistic. Just another 'deadbeat dad'!! My worse fear, is that this happens and that my children never really know how much they mean to me.

If the way we handle divorce and child issues in Canada is a reflection of how we wish to create a healthier Canada for the future, then I am afraid that we must return to the drawing board. We have created a system that does not place 'respect' for all persons as its fundamental pillar. It has taken me a long time to realize that the dictum 'that children are first' or that they 'are our most precious resource' may be flawed or incomplete. I suggest instead that a system that aims at creating healthy adults and parents offers a better chance at ensuring that the future of Canada, through our children, is guaranteed. The reverse, I am afraid, does not impart the essential respect that children must learn from their elders' example.

Finally, it is unfortunate that your article did not include any suggestions on how to keep this debate open in Parliament.
PS. I've never felt compelled to write anything like this, and I hope that the article can be sent to every member of parliament and legislature. Unfortunately my story doesn't seem too different from the many others (that I read after writing my story)
Thank you.........

Date: April 17, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I am a separated dad who always meets my financial and parental responsibilities. But I am worn out. I allowed my ex to take control because to do otherwise would have resulted in WW3. We have divided assets etc but have not yet gotten divorced because we can't agree on custody (I want joint because I don't trust her) or alimony. Eight years ago she decided to leave with her PHd and an income not that much less than mine. Now I earn more and her new lawyer has convinced her that she was entitled to alimony all along and is taking me to court. Apparently there have been recent rulings which overruled existing support contracts. There is little point in me working hard to get ahead because she will just ask for more money. I'm her insurance policy for retirement. When I say I'll take additional child care responsibility to allow her to earn more money, she says "over my dead body." I am worn out!

Date: April 17, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Well I read your article on deadbeat dads and as a divorced mother of 2 children aged 8 & 10,who is fighting to get $200. a month , I don't agree with all aspects of your article.I am listed with Maintinence Enforcement but since my ex has moved 3 times they say they can't find him now.Now he hasen't seen the children or even spoken to them in over 2 years and truthfully I hope he never enters their lives again.I am now in a new relationship and my boyfriend pays child support faithfully every month and when he missed one payment because of computer error they were ready to take him to court, now if one province can do that why can't all of them.Now i'm not saying that $200. a month is the difference between food or no food but its the princible of fact, he should be paying.Now I stay at home with my children ,mine and my boyfriends choice, so its not like I'm getting welfare.We live paycheck to paycheck like alot of people and as far as I'm concerned that $200. would at least cover the cost of school lunches etc. I will agree that so of the men in your article are being taken advantage of but I like to make point that some are just as the article says "deadbeats".

Date: April 17, 2001
Name: Eeva Sodhi

Comments:
What everyone can do is to complete the current public consultation survey by the Department of Justice on Child Custody and Access (include your comments about support as well).

There is only one way to put an end to this abomination: change the law so that the parent who refuses to share custody will lose it automatically. Only those parents who refuse to accept joint custody would pay child support, according to the needs of the child, not the wants of the mother.

False allegations are the silver bullet during divorce and custody. They destroy the entire life of their target. They are the most insidious form of abuse of the other parent and the children. A couple of penalties would put an instant end to them. Is it too much to ask that the judges rule by law and not by advocacy ideology?

Senator Anne Cools has been unsuccessful in her efforts to introduce a senate bill that would hold lawyers accountable. She said: "Honourable senators, the abuses which this legislation is intended to remedy are most visible in family law proceedings. I spoke to this matter in this chamber on July 13, 1995. That debate can be found at page 2052 of Debates of the Senate. That
day, I called the attention of the Senate to the 1995 Civil Justice Review Report and the use of malice, untruth, false statements under oath and perjury in judicial proceedings in the practice of family law in Ontario. ..."

The fact that this bill does not get past the first reading, speaks volumes about our political and legal system. The outrages continue, and the children suffer.

Date: April 17, 2001
Name:

Comments:
For many years it was the man being unfaithful and leaving the wife, now with most marriages, both husband and wife are out in work place,or more mobile- meeting people and being placed in situations that sometimes lead them to feel they are missing something from their lives. To-day we are seeing more and more women feeling this way. Although some fathers are still abusers, alcholics, etc. the majority of the ones I know have been trying to be good caring loving husbands and fathers. The wifes have been the ones to leave, with or without children-to find themselve's. Most people making a normal everyday wage which I am sure a lot of us still make $30,000-50,000 range cannot afford high payments to spouse for child and spousal support and still keep a home of their own. They also usually have children a lot of time, everyother weekend, most of summer, all or alot of holidays-this all costs money and even though they would not give up their time with children how fair is it that money goes to wife who can spend as she sees fit to do. (She is free most weekends to pursue other relationship s.) I am sure not everyone will agree, but have been seeing this more and more. Some men barely have enough to live on. Many resort to moving in with family or going back to college day situations where they have to share with friends.

Date: April 17, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Where do you begin with a subject like this?? Well I have an order for $500 per month that isn't worth the paper it is written on. I have never receiced a payment yet. I was divorced in 1993. I am signed up with FMEP, what a joke that is. Since I am gainfully employed and not costing the province anything why should they try to get a penny for me. I am at the point now that I could care less about the child support. I now after years of living from day to day can manage till the following payday. My son will soon be 18, so my ex need not hide anymore and maybe send him a card on his birthday.
I also see the other side of child support. My boyfriend pays on time every month. I watch him hand over his cheque as his ex and her unemployed husband walk back into their subsidized townhouse. They just got back from their honeymoon! I will end my comment right there. Thank you.

Date: April 16, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
i think it is a shame that most father get put into this position without getting the full story on what going on. i got 2 of my friend that committed suicide because they had no hoped for the future. i had a divorced in 1996 and it is a dramatic thing to put up with and i also got 3 boys and it was extremely hard emotionly thank you claude

Date: April 16, 2001
Name: R. Cox

Comments:
I believe that divorced fathers are being mistreated. The system has overreacted to a situation caused by a few deadbeat fathers. Too many fathers are left with little money to have a life of their own. Most fathers care about their children and want to make sure their kids have everything they need to have a good lifestyle and education. Some are being over extended when it comes to making payments and the system will not let them appeal the payments to reflect their current economic position. It is a shame that some fathers feel they have no recourse but to take their lives. Who benefits from such as tragedy? What about the "deadbeat" mothers who do not see a need to work or who live a lavish lifestyle while the father can't make ends meet? Shouldn't they be subject to some review? Let's change the system so that fathers have a better chance to live. Their children will be the winners. Not all fathers are deadbeats.

Date: April 16, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
REPULSIVE!!! The Family Law system is so unfair to men. I am a true feminist who expects all the rights and priviledges that men receive but I expect all the RESPONSIBILITIES too! The current system gives all the power to women and does not make them accountable for anything. Child support Should be based on the "REAL" cost of raising a child not on a percentage of a man's gross income. If a man has a high income, the ex-wife receives a lot more money then she should. This is another way of getting spousal support without calling it that! If the current laws remain the same, you will see women getting pregnant to secure a 20 year "pension". I know a man who currently pays a one night stand $1800 tax-free per month for his child. Sure beats working for a living doesn't it???

Date: April 16, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
My heart broke as I read you story. My son is going though a bad time again. His marraige ended
when he found his wife sleeping around. He had two little girls and she gave birth to a boy saying he was the father. Finally after paying support for two years for the boy he had the test done, it proved he was not the father. Funny how she knew right away who the real father was, and tests proved he was.She is remarried working,getting support from my son for the two girls,support from the boy's father,and her new husband cheque Plus the monthly child cheques.
Once again she is taking my son to court for more support for the girls.The money spent on the children at christmas was beyond belief. She moved to another province,but wants my son to pay for the girls to come see him
or at christmas her and her husband plus his son her son and the 2 girls came down to her side the family, but wanted my son to help pay for the gas or said the girls could not see him or go to his place.Yes I feel the fathers need the courts too open up there eyes .The fathers have a right to a life to,plus the bills keep coming in .Why don't they take the net income instead of the gross income. These fathers have a right to start a new life too.

Date: April 16, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I have been the single father of two girls for about nine years. My daughters are now both teenagers and doing fine. I received no support whatsoever from their mother and she only visited the children sporatically, often not seeing them for a year at at time. I never asked her for support, only to buy the children needed clothes and take an active role in their lives. They did not even receive this meager support. It cost me more in lawyer fees than any money I had hoped to receive. The courts are a joke when it comes to dealing with single fathers. All I can say is that it is her loss that she did not stay involved in her daughters lives. I now reap the benefits of being there every step of their maturing.

Date: April 15, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
While I read this article "Myth of the Deadbeat Dad" I was becoming more and more agitated. My thoughts were that there is no way there can be more men that can not pay than men that do not want to pay for whatever reason.I spent some time reading the comments posted and have calmed down quite a bit as I can see there are some parents in a bad situation. However I still do not believe that it is the majority of men not paying that cannot pay. Possibly because I live with having an ex who is not a responsible co-parent nor reasonable finacial contributor. Possibly because I have too many female and male friends in the same boat. One of the problems of this article (and there are many) is that it does not show the reality of what it takes to have wages garnished or money taken out of accounts or license revoked. I know because I have had several occasions of dealing with a Maintenance Enforcement Worker who found it more annoying to have to do her job than to just turn her attentions to making me feel bad for wanting something done after he was 12,000.00 in arrears. No I did not want his life a living hell but he also was learning he could get away with it, with the governments blessing. For Maintenance enforcement to actually do something the non-custodial parent must have been given plenty of opportunity. Add to this if you miss a payment or two they are not selling the non-custodial parents house, or taking away passports it would be quite a process for them to get to this point. which means there would have been plenty of time for the person who was unable to pay to seek legal counsel, and to get court in motion to vary the payment. I agree that the Child Support Guidelines introduced in 1997 need to be adjusted there are obvious flaws. I have found the onus is on me to prove my ex income as he is "self-employed" for obvious income-hiding reasons. This means I must pay a lawyer to try and get the child support my children are entitled too. So not only does he presently pay about 1/3 of what he should be paying but I am having to take more money out of my budget to pay for a lawyer, which takes more money away from supporting my children and giving them more opportunities in life. I agree that gross wage is not reasonable, but a person can also have additional tax, RRSP, pension, etc. deductions which leaves their net a lot lower than actual, so the line must be drawn somewhere to make this fair to every one. I get a little tired of the "she is remarried or has a live-in crap". I am remarried and my husband is an extremely loving, genuine co-parent, but he does not help pay for lessons, clothes, new bikes, school supplies, etc.. It may seem harsh but really is it, they do have a biological parent that should be able to pay for half their needs, he would have to if we were still together. My ex has chosen not to be a parent to the children, I have never stopped him from being one and in fact have begged him to be involved in their lives so that they do not have to deal with abandonment issues, etc.. A father is a childs example of what a man is, it is a very important role. Everyone has their own situation and story to tell, it would be nice if the childs best interests were taken to heart and if both parents could be mature enough to put their bitterness aside. But all too often it is easier to say I do not want to pay support because she uses it on herself not the children, or it bothers them to pay money to the b-tch. But the reality is I am the one taking them to lessons, going to school functions, providing birthday parties and money for them to attend dances, camp, birthdays, teacher presents, prescriptions, helping with homework, nursing a sick child, mending a broken heart, answering lifes questions, saving money for further education, all while working 40 hours a week. I am not saying I do not want this job, I get all the joys and the sorrows. but I am not rewarded for the job I do with receiving the appropriate financial help from my ex. I wish he would understand that child support is to help pay for their food, clothes, shelter. I still have to pay for pizza lunches at school, movies with friends, haircuts, that eyeshadow she just has to have. Writing a cheque is a much easier job than what I do. Yes the laws suck, but not just for the man or the woman, but mostly for the children. We must remember that support and access are two different things. And I feel badly for those who are kept from their children but it does not mean they should not pay. I also know how irritating it is to send a child off and say have a good time when dad is not paying. However the pay offs for being a mature person and parent will override any feelings of irritation or outright angry at the ex. Child support payments do not discourage a person from becoming independant that is such a far out statement, sort of like the commnet that a woman on welfare will have more children to get more welfare. there are exceptions to every rule, but let us remember they are the exception. That woman who did not attend her exs funeral, could it be because of the reason he decided to kill himself, do you think she would really be welcome. I could go on forever. the bottom line is the children, not lining laywers pockets, or giving more money to the government. Maybe before the right thing can be done for children the parents need to get their act together and worry less about screwing each other and more about providing for the most important job in the world that of being a PARENT.

Date: April 15, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Yes, I think fathers get a raw deal; consider this.
When my separation agreement reads fair and generous access and access is denied I need to go to court to get an access order; when access is denied again I have to go to court to get an enforcement order and if that doesn't work I can go to court again and ask for fines or jailtime.
If my ex wants more money she takes me to court, the judge agrees with her and awards her more money, I then have to pay her court costs plus my own.
If I can't pay or lose my job she reports me to Maintenance Enforcement and they take away my licence and passport and put my smiling face on their deadbeat dad web page. Only thing is I don't feel like smilin' anymore.

Date: April 15, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I totally agree that father's are getting a raw deal. I married a divorced father of two 18 months ago and in that time his Ex-wife has made our lives a living hell. As a woman I am disgusted and shamed with what women can do in the court system and what they are allowed to get away with. Lies after lies can be told without any consequences. We have been accused of the most disgusting crimes - abuse (physical and mental)to the children. Children's Aid has been called twice but both times they dropped her witch hunt. She claims that she is mentally ill and cannot work so my husband is paying her almost $2000 per month for spousal support as well as $800 per month for child support. He gets the children two weeks a month and she gets them the other two weeks. The guidlines do not take into consideration that he gets the kids equal time as her. She is too ill to work but not to ill to have the children. We just found out that she now is asking for more money. My husband works 12 hour shift work - nights and weekends. After she takes her share we are left with hardly anything. She is actually "better off". Every week we receive more bad news, more hassles and more heartache for the children. We were in court 10 out of 12 months last year. In her effort to destroy my husband and this new marriage the children are being dragged through the dirt. How much is a man supposed to take? A judge actually told us, and I quote, "The good parent eventually walks away." She assaulted me last spring and was charged. My husband came to my defence and was also charged. She got a peace bond and my husband went to trial. He too ended up with a peace bond but was told to go to a anger management course. Why wasn't she told the same? Why didn't she go to trial? The rules are definately different for the father. She can do what she wants and the police look the other way. Not so for the man. Now you might say that I am biased because this is my husband I'm talking about. I'm not. I have a 15 year old daughter who has not seen nor heard from her father for 14 years. I did not receive one penny for support or childcare. Now THAT is a deadbeat dad!!!!

Date: April 15, 2001
Name: Luc Palardy

Comments:
What I've read here in this forum sounds like the old proverb, 'an eye for an eye', between genders.
The logical solution to alleviate the current problem is to simply do a complete 180, and grant custody to fathers on separation. That, to me, is looking after the children's best interests, since there wouldn't be so much money and resources wasted. Custody to mothers isn't a given right.

Date: April 14, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I am one of those fathers whose wife left me after 40 years of marriage without enough money to live on. I am 69 years of age and retired, gave the best years of my life to his wife and is treated like dirt. She was 47 when she spent winters in Florida and still gave no reason why she left. Now nothing to live on. Discusted with the divorce law and judges who fafour the female above the man.

Date: April 14, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I am in total agreement with the statement that divorced fathers ofter get a raw deal. My son is a case in point. He lost his house to his ex-wife. She got custody of the children even though she is an unfit mother. His child support payments were set at more than 75% of his take home salary, leaving him with not enough money to live on.

Date: April 14, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Children will always require the assistance of both parents after separation or divorce. It is unfortunate that lawyers and the courts have to get involved. What they should do is force both parents to take independant counselling to educate the parents in putting their differences behind them and consider the children. The goverment must also take a stand and stop looking at their pocket book. We must work together to better ourselves, our children, and the future of the family.

Date: April 14, 2001
Name: Leonard Handrahan

Date: April 14, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I have seen Fathers get used by the system time and time again. I completely agree that divorced parents should not be forced to pay for college or university educations. If married parents are not forced to pay for their childrens college or university then where does the court get the right to force divorced parents to pay. In most cases I think parents want to help where they can but lets face it folks these so called "children" that they are paying for university are not "children" in the eyes of the law they are adults! What about parents trying to save for retirement. If they have to fork over up to $12,000 a year for their Adult childrens school, how are they to save for retirement. Why can't these adult children be responsible for paying for their own education, and be greatful for what is given to them by their parents.
The other issue I have is, why are the courts making child support decisions that don't reflect what the child support guidelines say? If the guide lines say; you make $50,000 dollars a year you pay $429 a month that is what you should pay no more no less. Every year the T4 slip should be reviewed, and that father should adjust either up or down the amount of child support that should be paid according to the child support guidline table. Only in special circumstances should the child-support collection agency be involved. An example would be a father that has not been working for a while.
I am married to a man who was married before and has two teenage girls. His ex-wife makes about $10,000 more a year than he does, and yet every year he forks over $14,000 in child support plus pays extras for Graduation pictures, camp, car repairs,car insurance, and the list goes on and on and on. According to the Manitoba Agriculture and Food Department it only takes $7,000 a year to raise a children of this age. So why is my husband paying the entire cost of raising the children plus extra! They are her children as well, why is she not expected to contribute to the cost of raising her own kids. Why is her salary not considered when child support is figured! My husband loves his children and has no problem paying his fair share to raise his kids, but it needs to be fair.
The other problem I have with the system is the mothers know they can take their ex's to the cleaners! So when my husband is faced with yet another rediculous expense beyond what he already pays, she always includes a threat of taking him to court; so he will have to pay child support while the kids are away at university on top of university costs. He already agreed to pay child support every time they come home from shcool, plus university costs. This threat comes every time she askes him to pay something extra to scare him into giving in. If you ask me it is harassment and it is unfair that she can hold this over his head because he is so afraid of what a judge might rule if he went back to court. I can tell you right now, if he did not have my salary to lean on he would be a statistic like all the other men that was in your article. He would not have enough money to pay his mortgage and the basic fundmentals to live after paying for child support, university costs, and all the extras he pays besides. And the irony is she makes more money than he does and she asked for the divorce in the first place! She is living on easy street taking the kids on cruises every spring break, and trips in the summer, and my husband would not be able to make ends meet without me!

Date: April 14, 2001
Name: Lorraine Mathers

Comments:
I was stunned and horrified at the magnitude of the persecution of divorced fathers by the "system".How is it that we have heard nothing about these injustices in total, but hear only isolated tragedies which we are led to believe are rare? Is the Charter of Rights and Freedoms applicable to select members of our society while others are beyond the pale?
Thank you for bringing this intolerable state of affairs to the public eye..now, what can we do about it?
Lorraine

Date: April 14, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I am in a blended family with a daughter of my own. My fiance has 3 very beautiful daughters of his own. We've been together for just over a year and as of yet, I've only seen pictures of the girls. The reason for this is that his ex won't let him see the girls. He's been fighting for access for 3 years now, every time he gets a legal aide lawyer he ends up losing in the courts and sued his ex's legal fees. Maintenance is threatening his license because he's trying to start a business and can't afford his payments until the spring rolls in and the phone starts ringing. What I can't understand is, here's a guy that loves and charishes the memories and thoughts of his children on a daily basis, why should he be ordered to pay support when he can't even see his children. If he isn't good enough to see his children, why should his money be good enough for her. Another point to ponder, is that in Manitoba all maintenance has to allow a person in rears with support is $250 living allowance a month. Now how can anyone afford to pay rent, food, clothing, gas, vehicle repairs, and anything else that comes up in a month on a budget of $250 a month.

Date: April 14, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
There are two sides to every story. My ex-husband has paid a total of $20.00 since September, 1986. I have been told repeatedly by SCOE that he is not employed and can not be traced. It's just great this way and I am satisfied. He was only orded to pay $425.00 per month, and now owes over $60,000. On the flip side, I have re-married and my new husband supports and cares for my children like they were his own. He also pays child support for his daughter. He agreed to pay $500.00 per month, as he was advised by our lawyer that going to court would probably mean over $800.00 per month. For a while I worked outside the home. When it came time to submit our joint financial statements for his ex-wife's lawyer, my income, as well as child tax benefit had to be included. When we were asked about expenses, only his could be used as the children and myself were not his financial responsibility according to the courts. Where is the fairness here. Needless to say, I no longer work, as the extra money we earned, the child support increased. Please tell me how come when we made more, all of a sudden, the cost of keeping his daughter increased. As a woman, I sympathize with a lot of fathers out there. They can't do anything without the fear of going back to court. They get a promotion or raise, and it isn't worth it, as they look at the net income, and forget the fact that taxes increase. Please don't get me wrong. We don't begrudge the money for his daughter. Now she is older, we would like to be able to pay part of it to her for her expenses, personal and clothing. We have also started a fund for college, but don't feel we should be responsible for the entire bill.
I know we are not the only ones out there in this position, but we also have two other children looking towards college/university and get now help whatsoever from their own father.

Date: April 13, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Absolutely! It's good to finally see some light shed on the subject, and written by a woman no less. My situation is not as drastic as some of those portrayed in your story and the comments to it, however I have also felt the heavy hand of the Family Court system. I don't mind paying and have so far had little trouble with the FRO. What really hurts is that while our children saw as much as or more of me in the last years of the marriage as their mother, I have absolutely no say in their lives beyond the hrs they stay with me (2 weekends and 4 evenings/ month).

Fortunately I still get to see them, unlike many others. Probably just as fortunate is the fact that I'm self-employed, otherwise I doubt that I would be able to get the necessary time for all the driving, even though they only live 20 km away.

Once again thank you for printing the article. Perhaps it can finally be the spark for a long overdue overhaul of the family law act.

Date: April 13, 2001
Name: Kathryn P.

Comments:
Dear Reader's Digest;
I am the recipient of child support payments. I have not gone without receiving a payment so I guess I am one of the lucky ones. My feeling is that most Supporting persons want to see their children brought in the best mannner possible. Anything short of this is an immature adult using their kids as pawns. I have a support order dating back before 1997. To think that a payor would be willing to give up their tax break because their ex-spouse requests it is ridiculous. My question for the government is this: " Why can't we have legislation that allows the payor to claim 50% of monies given and the receiver to claim 50 % of what was received as income. Both parties receive a partial benefit
and the payor doesn't feel like an ATM.

Date: April 13, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
We got divorced before the new child support guidelines came out. I was already paying support to my soon to be ex-wife for one child. The only thing we agreed upon was the amount of child support, and I had moved with work 700 miles to another province. The day the thing went to court the judge raised the child support since he figured it cost more to raise a child in that city. But the ex and my child actually were not living in that city! She got everything we owned in the divorce and I got all the bills and debts. I declared bankrupcy within a year, but still never missed a child support payment. I was not allowed to see my child until the divorce was final. It took a year to do this too, since her lawyer could never find her. She bounced from family to friends,and could never be located. After the divorce I still had a rough time trying to see my child. I was only given access 2 times a year, for a week each. I wanted for longer and more often, especially since I live so far away, it's a long drive, or expensive to fly for such short visits during the summer, etc. I am not a criminal and never been convicted of any offence. Am hard working and responsible. But the lawyers and judges and system seemed to be on another planet. Still costing me a fortune, she was on Legal Aid! My income was $100 over the legal aid limit!! So I paid my own way on top of it all. Then after divorce I found out she had a couple of small jobs and a brand new Mustang GT. Not kidding. I had a $500, 20 year old truck. Then I found she had a boyfriend, soon after settled with him, a new husband, another 60 miles farther away from myself where he lives. He has good job, nice owned home, etc, etc. I still make payments. I don't mind making payments, I love my child. But then the guidline came out and I find I would have to go to court to change it, at more expense and so far away, etc. But I don't put a value on my child. And it's easier to have the monthly amount stay the same now until I am done. Whereas I would have to keep changing it, and increasing it as the years pass or my income goes up, using the guideline that they came out with. Also the ex did not want to do the new guideline either. This was a couple of years ago. I get a tax break on the amount I pay, and I doubt she doesn't declare the income. So she wants to leave it alone!

Date: April 12, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I totally agree with all the recommendations that you have put forth in your article. I have just one suggestion. Besides the amount of child support being tax deducable it should also be proven by the recipient with receipts that the money is being spent on the children it is intended for and not for gambling, drinking, partying. The children are then sent to their fathers for a visit and they are dressed in rags, no appropriate clothing for weather, and with a list of items for which the father has to buy. If a father pays child support of over $10,000 a year for two children and the mother is making some $30,000 a year in wages, there should be no reason why they are going without. As a father it seems it does not matter how the mother treats the children she is automatically deemed a more suitable parent.

Does a mother who has the custody of the children have the right to uproot the children and move out of province away from their family and father just because she wants revenge? Why do the courts allow this? Why can't the father be able to use the cost it takes to transport or visit his children when the ex moves them out of province as a tax deduction?

Why is the child support guidlines based on a gross yearly income or estimated yearly income for everyone? Yes, some people get a regular paycheque in which they can count on. But there are those who work in areas that their paycheques are quite different from month to month. For these people why could there not be a system put into place where if you make more one month you would pay more child support, if you make less your would pay less. Let's face it if the couple were still together that would have been the reality of their life. Why is it the father who has to absorb all the downfall yet the mother assumes no responsibility.

For example, a father who works construction and can be laid off for periods of time. He doesn't know how much he will work a year yet the courts determine that he will make x amount of dollars. If he doesn't he has to go back to court and apply for a variance. When he is laid off he cannot afford the court costs as most of his money is tied up in child support. For example, a man who gets $1600 a month from Unemployment insurance who has to pay $1000 a month for child support and a $400 a month for a truck so that he can go to work when there is work what does that leave him with. Basically he sleeps in the truck! Also since the children live out of province he cannot afford to see his children and it is the children who suffer. They have as much right to see their father as their mother. I believe the courts are in place to make money and not for the benefit of the children. They should start looking at what is best for the children and not how long a lawyer can drag it out. As far as I am concerned lawyers should not be allowed to get involved. We should have a system in place like Sweden.

Date: April 12, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
A resounding YES! Tales of punitive and mean-spirited judgements are all too common. A close personal friend of my wife and I is trapped in a situation identical to one described in the article. Fortunately for him, he earns above the national average, so is managing to keep himself afloat. But I can tell you this; he's not a happy man. He's also fortunate to be able to see his kids every second week-end but if his ex decides to leave the area, he's powerless to prevent it. In the words of a now-forgotten author, "most men lead lives of quiet desperation". So true.

Date: April 12, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
WOW! I thought that my common-law husband was being treated unfairly, but thought it was just bad luck with the judge and the lawyer that he had. After reading many of the comments to this "dead beat dad" article I now know that it is true what they say about the manner in which men are treated in our courts. I am appaled! I am a divorced women who had the easiest most amacable divorce you can imagine! This is probably because I have no children. ironically one of the main reasons I divorced my husband is because he didn't want children after telling me initially that he did! My now commonlaw husband has been put through the ringer. I have 2 points I want to make. Why is it during the court battles that we've been told many times by judges and lawyers that "access with the children" is not supposed to have anything to do with "child support". Access should have no bearing. Yet after reading these articles there seems to be a direct link between the two issues. Secondly, the impact of the financial distress as well as the emotional stress not only affects the divorced couple and their children, but also the new "spouse" such as myself. I have had to support my new spouse financially and emotionally through the past 2.5 years or so and it has placed a burden on my finances and emotional well being. In my case, the ex-wife of my common-law husband is a compulsive liar. She also loves to share all the "dirty details" of the divorce with the children The children should be removed from her custody. She has on numerous occasions demonstrated an inability to properly provide for them emotionally and spiritually. She decides to change her mind regarding access anytime she feels like it. No one, not lawyers, not police can help the Dad. Is there any way that this evidence submitted as a result of this article can be forwarded to the federal and provincial government for review. Maybe a few judges should get up to speed on the reality of cause and effect.

Date: April 12, 2001
Name: Deborah McGraw

Comments:
Yes I do think that divorced men are treated unfairly by not only the courts, but by biased treatment in the media.

Even in your article, in the April 2001 issue, you fail to mention that, although fewer in actual numbers, per capita there are just as many if not more deadbeat mothers. The one case noted by lawyer Susan Baragar illustrates this point very well.

It is not just deadbeat dads or deadbeat moms, it's deadbeat parents. The problem sometimes is that they hate each other more than they love their children.

Even in the above-mentioned article, when reference is made to children, it is HIS children. Shouldn't it be THEIR children or even the children. Daddy wasn't alone in any of this. Just as it takes two to make a marriage, it takes the same two to break it and then everyone has to live with the consequences.

The courts, the media and the public have to start getting their facts straight. Then the pendulum can swing back and rest somewhere comfortably in the middle. We need to have a level playing field so that everyone concerned gets an even break - moms, dads and especially the children - and the money being spent for lawyers to keep going back and forth to court can be put to better use.

Date: April 12, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I am tired of hearing about "dead beat dads" & "weekend warriors", but we as a society have created these people and more aften than, encourage it.

While not all fathers want to raise their children, our legal industry often makes it easy for those who leave to do so, and then treat all fathers the same. And when a father does comes to the forefront and tries to do the right thing (father his children), he is applauded by society and penalized by our legal industry.

Well I am such a father of two children. And surprisingly I did win custody of them 50% of the time. Working a shift that allows me to spend 75% of the days with them, I care for their medical & dental appointments, religious unbringing, volunteer weekly at their school and coach their sports teams. I must provide a similar standard of living and equal meals. But as my ex-wife offers in court in her battle to receive 100% of their child tax benefits, "I am a father because of availablility". Despite my obvious love for both of my children and my continued desire to father them, there is an obvious deep contempt for fatherhood by our biased courts.

Bear in mind that my ex-wife works & left me for a new partner who also works. The recognition the courts gave me (judges have free reign in ordering child support in shared custody) was to ever so slightly reduce my child support from the maximum I would pay under sole custody, even though I must support my children 50% of the time. And because I share the children with their mother, I am not allowed to benefit from the equivalent-to-spouse credit or child tax benefits. This reversed our standards of living from before our marriage.

Yet if I don't share my children with their mother (I should), but split them up and father one child all of the time instead of both half of the time, my payout in child support combined with the tax breaks that I now receive, is reduced to 15% of what I pay now, and neither parent incurs any additional expenses or savings. Amazingly, now our legal industry encourages me not to father both of my children.

Yet those within our legal industry continue to complain that too many divorced parents don't get along. Well wake up! You don't treat fathers and mothers equally. What would happen if we as parents emulated our legal industry and treated our sons & daughters differently because of their gender? How long would it be before they were at odds. We have created this problem.

Family law today does not represent or support the needs or wishes of the people. It is an atrocity exceeded only by the Holocaust. While society wants fathers to assist in raising their children, a divorced father in 2001 is treated no different than Rosa Parks was in 1955.

And while society has been able to put men on the moon and tear down the Iron Curtain, we still cannot provide a competent body of jurisdiction that treats fathers and mothers as equals. Judges continue to show a deep contempt towards something that our society and our children want and need - FATHERHOOD! Our legal industry today is not doing what is was intended to do, back when it was a Justice System.

Today there is far to much violence and destruction in society. Our legal industry is at fault for some of this. We need a justice system again that deals in right and wrong. Unfortunately, society will not change for the better until our leaders change for the better. Until then fathers, you are simply Rosa Parks trying to find a seat on the bus.

Date: April 12, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Wow... WHAT KIND OF A SYSTEM IS THIS?

I am seeing a divorsed father and I know (first hand) that this is existing. Ok so there are some dead beat parents out there, and I don't think any one is argueing that fact, but MOST ARE NOT. Most are just trying to survive and have a really, really, REALLY hard time doing that.

Can anyone please explain to me why the court system (ruled in 1997) that child support payments are no longer a tax deduction?

This in itself makes absolutely no sense to me! An ex-spouse struggles to make a child support payment and at the end of the year gets killed on his income tax....Huh? Pay support every month, Pay lots of income tax, Pay taxes on pretty much everything you purchase... Pay, pay, pay and here you go, no tax break! This is a sure way to prevent the dead beat parent problem!

HEY GOVERNMENT PEOPLE, WAKE UP AND SMELL THE JAVA!!! If you want to resolve the problem of dead beat parents, give them a break, give them a way! In fact, you should give the paying parent the tax break and not tax the recieving parent the income.

Perhaps the system could take the payments made and put it into the child's name tax free. OPPS, but what am I thinking? That would mean the government would get less...Sorry governemnt people, dumb idea! Why should you get less, then there would not be enough money to hire people to think up ding-dong systems like the one we have right now.

I am not sure if anyone is thinking about these children's welfare.

What happens to a child...
- when a parent is forced to commit suiside?
- when his parents are arguing over money issues?
- when he sees his parent(s) struggle with money?
- when he is no longer allowed to see one of his parents because of these struggles?
- GROWS UP?

These are very scary questions to me, an adult imagine a child?

I myself, struggle with this issue and I do not have any children of my own. I see the financial strain that my partner indures and all of this puts a strain on us as a couple.

I want to thank you Readers Digest for bringing up an issue that most people do not know about because almost all medias will only talk about the Deadbeats... and boy is there another side to this issue! So thank you again, hopefully it will open some eyes and some minds and result in some positive changes!

Date: April 12, 2001
Name: Pierre de Repent

Comments:
If you are married and by some misfortune, become unable to provide sufficiently for your children, whether it be through unemployment, underemployment, or whatever else life throws at you, what do you do ?
You and your mate keep trying, you keep seeking gainful and better employment, you keep looking, and if need be, ultimately you turn to government agencies for help in order to feed, clothe and care for your children properly, and go on loving and caring for them. Although it may be slightly degrading at the time, you will find that most of the people you deal with are very helpful, and sympathetic to your plight........

If you become a single Dad, even if it isnt " YOUR CHOICE " under the same circumstances, and become unable to pay your child support as stated by the " GUIDELINES " , what happens ? Same ?

Not quite !!!
First you get totally degraded and hounded by the Gestapo ( F.M.E.P. ), made to feel like a criminal
Ultimately, they will garnishee your wages, revoke your drivers licence, ( making it even more impossible to get back on your feet ) and in some cases even throw you in jail....!! And to add insult to injury, most often than not, while all this is going on, you lose your right to see your children....!!!!

Seek help from government agencies ??? Forget it ! You have now become a second classs citizen !
You now have less rights than the lowliest of lowly criminals... They will only scuff you away as a " DEAD BEAT DAD "....

On the other hand, while this is going on, Mom can collect welfare, (Even if she has a working, live-in boyfriend ) and the whole world feels sorry for her, while she is telling the kids how "BAD" Daddy is for not making his " PAYMENTS ", and turning the children further away from him....

Is this equality ? Is this justice ? Is this fairness ?
I think not !!!!!

Discrimination based on gender? YES
Biasism based on marital status? YES
Apartheism? Yes

What has become of promoting family values ? instead of promoting "indepence at any cost" ?
( Remember the old days, when the province of Quebec offered free land to families who had more than 10 children ? )
Where is the incentive for families to stay together when it is financially rewarding to be a single parent with custody....
Our children have become nothing but a CASH CROP...

Canada, I used to be proud to be a canadian....

Date: April 11, 2001
Name: Mike Gluss

Comments:
There’s a witch hunt going on and it’s against men and men’s rights fueled by radical feminist organizations and backed by government agencies. It seems to be directed primarily against what these organizations call “deadbeat fathers and husbands” though not much is said against “deadbeat mothers and wives”. The power of these militant feminists is unbelievable and the main reason I suspect, is simply because of the incredible amount of government financial support they receive, when in contrast men’s groups receive very little if anything at all. The funding allows staffed halfway houses to be acquired and the ability of so called “abused” women to maintain lawyers at their discretion. There’s no doubt that there are abusive and violent men out there, but believe it or not, there are just as many abusive and violent women.

The way things stand these days, as soon as the word abuse and/or harassment is mentioned, men are automatically guilty and are suddenly faced with court orders, police at their door, family maintenance goons threatening to confiscate your passport, your drivers license, monthly fines and incarceration when you refuse to pay. Something has to be said and done to investigate and draw in the reins of these militant feminists along with the government agencies that support them and prevent future incidences like this one to be aimed at innocent men. I sure would like to know how many “dead beat women/mothers” are chased by family maintenance.

Sincerely
Mike Gluss

Date: April 11, 2001
Name: dawn Kunka

Comments:
I have submitted letters in the news papers in view of the family maintence act. I strongly feel
that when two peopple decide to divorce that this
so called 7000.00-8000.00 dollars for the children
should be split between both parents. The father
pays 3500.00 per year, the mother pays 3500.00 per
year. Now this would stop the fight wouldn't it,
put the shoe on the other foot.The money should be put into the child 's account and a mediator for the child would see the money was put towards the
raising of the child.This would eliminate greedy
spouses, help the spouse that cannot pay the whole sum, eliminate the war between two spouses of where the money goes.

Date: April 11, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I have read most of the comments and agree that some men are definitely dead beat dads but the majority are not. Generally, the real dead beat dads do not care if they see their children at all. The fathers who fight to see their children but fall on difficult financial times (not by choice) are not dead beat dads.

I honestly believe that the courts do not care what happens to a father after the divorce. I also have seen this on many occasions as I am a legal assistant in the area of family law. The lawyer I work for prefers to represent women because the laws are completely unfair to men and that he could never "win" a case for a man until the pendulum swings back and lands somewhere in the middle where the children come first and that every one is equal.

My husband has not been able to secure a full-time PERMANENT job for the past 4 years. He has worked for companies that told him that they are very busy and that the position is permanent. Within 6 months, he is laid off because they over bid and/or lost their potential contracts. Another company is hiring only apprentices. We could, very easily, look for work in other provinces or in the US but that means that we cannot see his children or our families.

As some of us are well aware, when you have no income bills fall behind. For each month that you cannot pay a bill, it takes double the time to bring it current. If he applies to court every time he gets laid off, it could take 6 months to a year before the matter would be heard before a judge. Court appointed mediators do not work because the matter is deemed "too complicated" for them to work out.

It does not matter that his ex left him for another man, took 80% of the furniture etc., and left him with junk. It does not matter that he had just finished school and was unemployed when she left and that he had to borrow money from friends and family to purchase furniture etc for his new home. It does not matter that his ex and her new man make a lot more per year than we do. It does not matter that we have a child and another on the way. Nothing in his life matters. This is what scares me, how can I ensure a good life for our children when I never know when the rug will be pulled out from under me and when I know that the courts say that "the children from the first marriage come first". The word "custody" empowers the custodial parent. The parents should agree to stay in the same town/area and not move until the children have graduated from high school. Each party should be involved in the childrens lives equally. All decisions made about the children should be done jointly - after all, you were both there when the child was conceived - the parents are joined together, despite divorce, until the children are grown and independent. Mandatory child maintenance should be eliminated and replaced with a consentual splitting of all costs associated with the children and/or an amount of money can exchange hands which must be mutually agreeable and reasonable.

Also, ex wives who create access problems preventing the good dads from seeing their children and being involved in their lives should lose custody and the children should go to the father.

Date: April 11, 2001
Name:

Comments:
It was great to see someone finally address this issue.
There is not enough space to say all

that has happened to me,but in short I am ready "TO TAKE THE PIPE".
I would like to discuss this with someone who could somehow help me before I (lose it).
They have taken my children,they have taken my licence, they have in turn taken my ability to obtain work which in turn has taken away any chance I had in obtaining U.I. after I was laid off.
This has all come about because my X used and abused the system in her favour.I haven't even been in court to give my side of this incredable story.
Is this what it's all about?
It seems to me that there is nothing I can do.
I am at the end of my rope.
Did you know that the maintenance people will not give there address?
I can't talk to anyone about this because everyone looks at me like a "deadbeat dad".
This offends me a great deal, it is also making me very angry.
I feel that the only way for my to even make a dent is to ask for help, I have tried on my own and am getting nowhere.
If you can, I am begging for help.Iam writing you because you are the first publication that I have seen that gives this issue It's due.
I do not expect a reply but I sure would welcome it. Thank you for your time.

Date: April 11, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
You've received too many comments to read but I never read one yet that shows the "total" extent of the persecution of the Maintenance Enforcement Department! .. I can't give you ALL the details but my last $10 were garnished from my bank account, although I was fired from my job and my house was foreclosed on, my support payments were raised from $100/month to $500.. my driver's licence was cancelled, along with my passport, now I've been notified that any federal payments (unemployment, GST rebate, pension and income tax return -- all nonexistent!) will be garnished.. to add stupidity to insult, the garnishment order cost $40, the passport cancellation application cost $3++ (payable in 5 installments over 5 years) .. WHAT NEXT? .. I haven't worked for 5 years .. Next they will take my birth certificate? .. I've been bankrupted by 2 divorces, lost two houses and I've considered suicide several times .. the only alternative I had was to live with my elderly parents (over 70yo) and try to help them in return for room and board.. When will the government get OUT OF OUR ASSES!?! .. I've had it up to THERE!
To make my story longer, i think everyone knows who the REAL deadbeats are.. my ex-wife had 3 husbands before me, the (female) judge gave her the total equity in my house after a 4 month marriage, I wasn't even offered visitation of my son who was born 8 months after the separation.. I don't want to bore you with a whole book worth of details BUT thanks for the article! .. Walk a kilometre in a deadbeat's shoes before you condemn him!

Date: April 11, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Dear Donna,

I recently read your article "Myth of the deadbeat dad" in the April 2001 Reader's Digest. It was a fluke really, since I do not usually buy the magazine. I had been rushed to hospital for emergency surgery last Friday, 6th of April, and my mom bought it for me to read while waiting to be operated on!
When I happened to "fall upon" your article, it just blew me away for two reasons: first of all, nobody gives a damn about "men's rights" in this country and the fact that they are committing suicide at an alarming rate, as a result of out of control corruption in Canadian divorce courts (I am still here but that doesn't mean I was very far away myself!)! Second, you are part of the "sex" that has "carte blanche" in divorce court; I thank you for your insight and journalistic honesty!

Date: April 11, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
in the beginning of my seperation i thought my husband was getting a raw deal. knowing the family budget i considered what the government was asking for to be unfair to him. the only ones that would end up suffering was the children. now that it has been a couple of months with no support, and seeing him with his new car and cell phone. i'm beginning to wonder. his theary was that the government was going to take him for everything that he has, so he might as well live his life to the fullest. the children are still getting a raw deal as their father lives his life to the fullest. it is a no win situation.i would rather he paid less and did more with his children, than make excuses for not doing anything with them.

Date: April 11, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Yes, I do believe that divorced fathers do get a raw deal in many cases. Although I am not a "divorced father" I am associated with couples whom are divorced. I have the priveledge of viewing both sides;and, it saddens me that the people, the governments, and the court of laws are ignorant to the obvious.

For one, the fact that our Court of Law would base support payments on gross vs net is a huge oversight. Second, the payments should have a standard "stop" date. Once a child reaches the age of majority (In Alberta that is 18 years), payments should be stopped.

Should either parent choose to support their child in further education (post secondary schooling) the choice should be made by each parent on their own. If the choice of both parents is to NOT support the child financially, the child should take the responsibility on themselves.
Recommended reading: "The Millionaire Next Door". Although there are many other books offereing the same type of information, this book clearly explains why children should be responsible for their own finacial situations and educations. Creating dependability is not in the child's best interest; nor in the Countries.

This topic raises many emotions within me - mostly frustration. I have witnessed too many woman using their support payments for their own lifestyle vs. that of their children.

I have witnessed too many fathers having no choice in the raising of their children.

And I have witnessed too many of the above situations that are real because the woman was either unfaithful and/or selfish. Yet, because their children live with them, they are rewarded for their actions while the loyal and supportive spouse (the divorced father) pays through the nose in financially and emotionally.

Date: April 11, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
After reading your story I do agree to some extent.
I do know of some fathers who are very good at paying their support payment as well as paying for thier childerns sports and hobbies.
I know other father's who are being taken advantage enormously by paying outrages child support or alamony, it's not fair.
Iam a single parent of a 6 year old boy my ex husband is a true dead beat Dad.We seperated 7 mths after my son was born, in those 5 and 1/2 years I have recieved maybe a thousand dollars. My ex sees his son pretty much on a regular basis. When I ask for help to pay for swimming lessons, Beavers, Soccer,Daycare Etc I get the same answer "next week " which of course never comes.It dosent seem to bother him That I had to go on welfare for a period of time which wasn't easy when you have alot of pride or that society paid for his son.
Iam very good with money which is enabled my son and i to do pretty good on our own.
But i do resent that my ex dosent pay and seems to be getting away with it.
We have been to court twice but my ex plays the game of quitting a job and becoming self employed thus wages can't be garnished. We are sighned up with the Faimly Responsible Office which i have had no success. I have called several times to let them know hwere he is working and living but nothing gets done.
I feel for theses Fathers that are being taken to the cleaners,When men like my ex get away with not paying or being penalized.

Date: April 11, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Well it is true that some fathers are not in the financial position to pay their child support payments, there are also lots who choose not to. They use this as a means to hurt the custodial parent for ending the relationship, moving into a new relationship, or just because they would like to have that "hold" over them. What needs to be done within the government is to monitor the so called "dead beat dads" and see what their financial position is. If it is due to a lay-off or lower wages then an adjustment should be made to the court ordered amount. Maybe the answer is to take a look at the income tax filed by this person and set the child support payments for the year by a percentage of that figure. This would make the amount each year different, but would take into account job changes, etc. If the amount the parent was responsible to pay was realistic then maybe more "dead-beat dads" could live up to their obligations.
At the same time, this method would also be able to determine the parents who are choosing not to pay, and stiffer penalties should be applied to those people.
My ex "offered" to pay a small amount of child support for our son, but he chooses to pay this sporadically. It depends on what he wants to buy for himself, or if he wants to go on a holiday, or if he's mad at me. He has gone as far as to say (in writing) that he will deny parentage and/or quit his job if I take this to maintenance. I have no choice but to take it to maintenance as I do not make as much money as he does, and I am the one raising our child. I even asked him to buy shoes and clothes our son needs (in leiu of maintenance)and he refused to do this, but he just bought himself a new truck. He has not tried to keep in touch with our son, and when our child calls him and leaves a message he will not even return the call. Who does this hurt? Not me. Not him. It only hurts the child, and it is unnecessary. This is truly the scenario of a "dead-beat dad" !

Date: April 11, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I think most men want to help their kids every way possible. But the courts and ex-family members make it rough. I went through a divorce and it started friendly but when "friends" started giving advice it got ugly. I believe joint custody is an answer to some of the problems involved in a divorce. In my case the ability to see my daugther was used as a way to extract more money from me when every my ex-wife felt she needed. The courts have to look at each case differently and they have to look at the times not the dark ages. I think most men just want to be treated fair during and after the divorce. The emotions towards their wife may of changed for what ever reason but their emotions for their kids only continue to grow as they grow. I know there is some bad apples but lets not used to big a brush to paint the picture of divorced Dads. The Dads I know love their kids and only want the best for them. I also know some Dads that have ex- wives that don't want anything to do with the kids but the courts won't do a thing to make them help the dads out raising those kids, and thats not fair.

Date: April 11, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
My husband and I have a blended family of his, mine and ours. I do not take all that the government allows for my children because that would leave my ex without a place to have the kids for visits, enough food to eat and the gifts that he would be forced to give the kids would look like he didn't care. My husband's ex on the other hand, takes everything that she can get. We have his daughter 47% of the time and still write her a cheque every month. This woman then makes us pay for school supplies, field trips and all of her extra curricular activities or she would do without. She refers to the clothing that she buys as "hers" even if given as a present. His daughter is not allowed to bring clothing that belongs to "her" and if anything we purchase makes it's way to her house, she throws it out. All of this has gone to court and the judges simply say that it is her word against ours. She constantly harrasses us at our home, to the point that our other children are scared that she is going to break in and the police say that it is her word against ours- even with witnesses. My husband asked the courts to lower his child support and the judge told him that his other 3 children didn't matter (including an infant) and that she should make him pay more for him being so ungrateful. Now, this is a child that is with us more than her mother(once her mother is done pawning her off to babysitters and her parents). My husband got tired of having her at the door with her hand out so he enrolled himself with the Family Maintenance Enforcement service. They immediately began to harrass him- that is until he pointed out that he was in fact early with his payments and that it was his signature on the enrollment documents. He is now on his way back to court to, for the 5th time, enforce his visitation schedule. This time she kept his daughter from school . Given that one decent judge gave him a Peace Officer Enforceable Order, the RCMP said that they wouldn't arrest her as the order said to do. They wouldn't even charge her. When is our society going to value it's dads and tell these women that abuse the system to stop acting for themselves when this is about the children. I think that women's rights have gone too far when they allow the blatant discrimination of it's good fathers and what amounts to the emotional abuse of the children.

Date: April 11, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Thank You,Readers Digest for writing about a
topic that is so widely devasting yet does not
get much attention from what I call phony media.
The only injustice that you did not tell is
this scenario. A women leaves her husband because
shes falling for another man who is also married
with children.The husband must pay say $450.00
per child and has two children which is $900.00
per month.The man who is now living common-in law
with the exwife has three children in which he pays $300.00 per child per month which works out
to $900.00.So the husband who just lost his wife,
children and home is now making the payments for
the new man who could just send the husbands payments to his exwife with no finacial downfall
whatsoever.To me and other men who live in the
real world this also seems like an injustice.
For the judges,governments and lawyers who
decide these excessive monetary payments that has
caused some of these poor men to suicide,their
names should be giving to the fatherless kids
when they become adults as the killers of thier
Dads.

Date: April 10, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
The present support collection system causes more damage than it provides benefit.

There is no incentative for change as most instances of enforcement are on behalf of the province and not the children involved.

Even the Federal Government benefits, when a Provincial Maintnance department issues a demand to Revenue Canada for arrears Revenue Canada charges $400+ administration fees to the supporting parent.

Manitoba changed it's legislation in 1995 or 1996 making it impossible to defend against being wrongly brought before their Maintenance Enforcement Court. If a Designated Officer says that an amount is owing the only recourse is to file in Family Court to have the order reviewed and if te court agrees with your position the amount may be reduced.

Manitoba enforces orders to the best of the ability of it's Designated Officers, most barely understand the orders they are enforcing and have little knowledge of the act they administer.

Having an order that is variable or accomodates interupted earnings is not allowed. Should you have interupted earnings and not be able to pay for a period you must appear in court.

For the past six years I have had to appear about thiry times to try to correct errors in application made by the Designated Officer. With no success. They have allowed to accumulate stagering arrears with minimal monthly payments which may allow me not to appear again. But knowing the system I will be back.

This system is designed for Lawyers and the Departments as a form of job security. I doubt if in fact heir is much benefit to any child.

During all the appearances I have seen parents who were not able to pay support because of injury, layoff, business bankruptcy or being in jail. Only one parent stated that they were refusing to pay. She was upset her kids were taken to the territories and she was not able to see them. Interestinglg enough because her ex was out of province even though earning considerably more than she was this could not be brought before the court to vary the order because no one would cover the legal bills.

While this does not cover by half my experiences or thoughts being a Deadbeat Dad I have learned this is an issue best dealt with quietly.

Date: April 10, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Fathers are getting a raw deal. My finance is a father of two young girls. His Ex-Wife makes it impossible to have some balance in the girls lives when it comes to visitation with their father let alone some form of a custody agreement. The girls need their dad in their lives on a regular basis especially when their current living condition is far from desirable. Fathers are seen by the courts as irresponsible individuals who do not want to pay for their children when it actuality my experience has been that the fathers would do anything to care and support their kids but have been put through the ringer financially and have nothing left after parting with their spouse. Its not a matter of not wanting to pay its a matter of not being able to pay.

I feel it is also necessary for the father's parents to have access to their grandchildren on a regular basis as well. The kids need their grandparents. It is my understanding that the courts virtually don't give any visitation to the father's parents. In my situation, trust me, the girls are in far better hands with the grandparents on the dad's side than the mother's side.

The whole situation is very frustrating. I salute you for trying to make a difference for the fathers out there being persecuted by a double standard system. They just want to spend time with their kids as opposed to trying to make a difference in court through legal aid services which is another very frustrating story altogether.

Date: April 10, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I was in a Dr's office today reading your article. I have a whole differnt perspective on this. You see I'm the mother that pays the child support who doesn't see her children very often due to a very nasty ex-husband whose managed to alienate my children from me. A marriage to him was like being in a cult. I was very lucky to escape but my children are now stuck. After a very expensive divorce you finally have to stop fighting and hope tht the kids will realize what is going on and will turn out all right. There isn't a moment in my day that I don't think of them. My ex has the luxury of unlimited financial resources and doesn't work. I wish my support payments could be directed to a college fund for my children. I hate writing cheques to him. I'm sure there are other women out there like myself. The courts are very unfair and children are always the victims of these messy situations.

Date: April 10, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I have just completed my divorce with my ex-wife, approximately 15 months after I left her.

"For the Sake of the Children" we have remained "friends" (READ: to save lawyer's costs). To me this meant not challenging the rules and letting the legal system take it's lawful course. Right. As a result of this (and in this day and age where lawsuit payments reward the stupid) I wonder how valid a suit would be that challenges the fact that my ex-wife has taken away from me one of life's greatest rewards - being a full-time father?

Having my children from Friday night to Sunday afternoon every second weekend does not make me the father that I wished I could have been. How can I share in my children's daily experiences and have an influence on these little persons that I helped to bring into this world? The fact that this has happened to me is the most bitter pill to swallow - even moreso than the financial aspect of a divorce.

Meanwhile, I have to share the financial burden of raising them as if I was there full time ( but with no intellectual input), even if she made more than I did annually, and that her household income is combined with the income of her new live-in partner (at my old house while I live in an apartment). Why aren't both incomes considered when calculating child support expenses? Because.

Moreover, it is my responsibility to transport my children every second weekend (over 400 km). This is combined with weekend expenses (very high as any Dad knows) and the occasional "I forgot to include ---, can you please pick some up", which can range anywhere from socks to medication. Meanwhile she and her partner have just installed a new hardwood floor... Can I include these "hidden" expenses? No.

Also, I have created two savings accounts for each of my children and well as two RESPs for their future needs, to which she does not contribute as she "doesn't have the money". Does this matter? We'll find out soon as apparently there is a case here where the Father saved for his children's post-secondary education but yet his wife claims that his saved amount should be subtracted BEFORE the final cost is split. Is this fair?

I have also recently learned that she has also received an equivalency-to-spouse credit on her income tax return. To this credit/deduction and all others she received in her return, I say "Thank you" to our government that treats all of its' citizens "equally" before the law. If you don't mind, I'll continue to contribute my "fair" share.

If anything that I learned from this government legislated mess, it is that I must pay for my wife's infidelity. However I hope that someday when my children are of age, and can decide which parent to be with, that today's hardships will tomorrow's joys.

Thank you, Reader's Digest, for this article and this board.

Date: April 10, 2001
Name: Norma Asp

Comments:
Your article "Myth of the Deadbeat Dad" is a serious indictment of our legal system and demonstrates the frightening power of special interest groups to influence public policy. Ideally these matters should be settled by a family court mediator. Such injustice and blatant bureaucratic stupidity should not be allowed to continue.

Date: April 10, 2001
Name: Darren

Comments:
maybe there is hope go to; canada.justice.gc.ca then click on programs and services,then child custodyand access then look for federal-provincal-territorial consultation on custody, access and child support in canada. Maybe if we stick together we can change it so are kids will benefit from this horrible mess. My wife and i divorced but not once did i say i was divorcing my kids.

Date: April 10, 2001
Name:

Comments:
As a result of a number of circumstances I left the job that I held at the time of my divorce, unfortunately I was unable to maintain my rate of pay and thus my support fell in arrears. I tried to have my support adjusted but the court felt that it had the right to tell me to go back to my old job in a town that I did not like living in. I would not do this. Maintenance in the meantime pulled my licencing privilages making it illegal for me to even search for a job as I live in a rural area. As a result, for the last year and a half I have been writing people from the director of maintenace enforcement to the premier with no results. Maintenance is directly responsible for my loss of income in this time period, I am unable to work without a licence and maintenance will not return it until I make my payments. It's a catch 22 situation. Until the courts became involved I got along with my ex-wife to the point that I babysat while she went on dates. I am now past $10,000.00 in legal bills as my ex is probably close to that, it is $20,000.00 that could have went to the kids if our courts would just mind their own business. Just because I am divorced does not mean that I lose my rights to maintain my own life. It's hard enough to get by these days on a single income, having to part with your after tax dollars makes it imposable.

Date: April 10, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
My mother left me and my two sisters at a very young age and my father raised me. My mother was only paying a child support of $100 dollars per month and when my sister moved to my moms house some years later, the child support stopped. I am now 21 and I am disgusted with the fact that there seems to be no "deadbeat mom" articles anywhere, but if a father misses one payment, he can go to prison. My father has provided me with the best future that I could have hoped for and my sister and I are well on our way to very successful careers (we are currently in University). On behalf of fathers that are raising their children alone; it is hard, but if my dad can raise 3 girls by himself than there is hope for anyone!

Date: April 10, 2001
Name: Bertha Poulin

Comments:
Yes I agree Fathers are getting a raw deal under bill C 41.What can be done to change the tax grab that the Government has imposed on divorced Fathers.The unreasonable child suopport when the Mothers are working and taking home thirty-one thousand a year. Where is her share in the support of the children that were born to both.
Where can one go to get the information to change this greedy law. Who can one contact to get it.
We have to stop the slaughter of young divorced fathers, what loss for all his family. Bertha Poulin.

Date: April 10, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Oh Puuleeeeease! Enough about the "poor noncustodial dad" bit. If you think paying child support is expensive, try raising a family as a single wage earning mother, who's income border lines the poverty level. Until 1997, the paying parent got a tax deduction, while the reciepiant payed income tax on the payment. If that's not enough, before the pay scale became effective, alot of times the child support payment was way below what the respondent could afford.

As far as driving the man to suicide..... again give me a break, what could possibly be a more selfish act. Just another way to make the family feel guilty that things didn't work out. What is a mother suppose to tell her kids?

I realize that alot of parents are responsible and reliable, and put the children's needs first. However, the ones who are not are often the ones who cry the loudest. I have been in a battle for 8 years to collect child support for my daughter. But her father reports no income. Therefore the Justice Department tells me I cannot get blood from a stone, however, he is still entitled by law to visitation. (Not that he takes advantage of this right.)

There may be a few cases where the father is treated unjustly, however, I believe far to many times, the family suffers from the "deadbeat dad" syndrome. Now that the courts are finally getting tough on these guys, I say it's about time!

Date: April 10, 2001
Name: Cant risk saying

Comments:
Thank you for publishing this article. Any media coverage of this situation has got to help. Divorced males are the most discriminated upon group of people in our country. Based solely on their gender, they are found "guilty" by the family courts.

My story is similar to the others here. The only "issue" my ex and I couldn't resolve during our divorce was her wish to move herself and OUR children 3000 km away. Her lawyer argued that "her need to start again" was in the best interest of the children. My lawyer argued that having a second loving parent close by was in their best interest. She won, of course. Now the best I can do is talk to them on the phone when they have to stay home alone together.

Date: April 10, 2001
Name: Deb Mabey

Comments:
I do feel that as a majority most men are not deadbeat dad's. I agree that the main reason for non-payment of support is financial. However, it is a sad reallity but unfortunately there are those who blatantly reject their kids for reasons not even worth listing. It is these fathers whom make it bad for everyone.

As for not being able to use your child support as a deduction I wholly agree with this process.
As a parent of 4 and still with my childrens father I realize that I am one of a growing minority. What bothers me most about fathers(mothers) complaining about not being able to claim their support paid to their ex-spouses is simply this. As a dual original parent family we do not get to deduct what we spend to support our children on our taxes so why should single parents be able too. I do realize that there is a deduction for children on your taxes for custodial parents, single or not. However, in a case of a married couple only one can claim this deduction although both parents support them. So what makes the non-custodial parent feel he/she has a right to an extra deduction for supporting a child they no longer reside with. There is still two parents supporting the children and one parent claiming the child deduction on taxes, and righfully so the custodial one. Children were not born into this world to be someone's tax deduciton. Is supporting your children after a breakup less important then when you are still together? I say not. Supporting your kids both financially and emotionally does not end with the divorce. They are still the responsiblily of both parents and a non-custodial parent who begrudges their children that support needs to take a second look at themselves and figure out where their priorities lie.

Date: April 10, 2001
Name: Pat Udholm

Comments:
Yes there are some dead beat Dads out there but they do not represent the large number of loving fathers who want the best for their kids. A lot of men have left their home in order that the kids are not uprooted and as such have to start all over making a new life for themselves with little or no money left after paying the child support. The biggest problem comes when the residing parent uses the money for other things and the father has to further foot the bill to make sure the kids are dressed properly or have the proper meals or pay for additional incidentals. If the mother is no good at financial matters the kids still suffer and often the father is digging into emptier pockets. I don't know what the answers to this situation might be, but there are no guidelines or ways of verifying that the money paid is going to the kids. I feel that the mother should be required to show how the money was spent at least then the father would have comfort in knowing that the money spent is going to the support of his children & not to some bad habit or something else unrelated.

Date: April 09, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I think that today's fathers deserve to have a break in their child support payments. I am currently undergoing a court maintenance variation and access battle with my husband this current time. The first appearance in the court house the judge looked at him and automatically told him that joint custody was out of the question and even though one mother is dening him access to his children, even though the court order previously says she cannot, the judge told him that they would deal with it at a later date> Now how fair is that to him, that he cannot even see his children. They are calling fathers dead beat parents, not in our situation, in our situation the mothers are dead beat parents, for not letting the father see his children, not being able to be an active part in the children's lives, and then they wonder why the children hide away from their father when they are finally brought face to face. The other mother in our situation, left for 3 years, not letting him know if his daughter was alive or dead or whatever the case may be. Then she heard that he was making money and guess who could be a father again, but only under supervised visits. What the hell has our government and society come to? I think that us tax payers should have a say in what is being done in our government and that the maintenance office/enforcement office should sit on it and rotate. They are useless except the only thing they know how to do is pull somebodies license without notice and garnishee wages to give to welfare receipients who are defrauding the welfare system. The welfare system where we are from was given taped conversations of one of the mothers stating that she was on welfare and living with her husband who was working and do you want to know what they did, they did nothing because she has children that have to be looked after. Well excuse me for being a paying canadian citizen who wants equal justice for all, but I think that they are all out to lunch. The child support guidelines should be revamped or you can expect a lot more deaths than what there is now.

Date: April 09, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Wow, I have been working for years at snuffing out these emotions, close to 20 years. Your article took only minutes to bring them back to life.

I have been sitting here trying to decide which “story” I should tell you. I have quite a few but when I think about it, they are not really different from all the others posted here. I don’t want to just add another story but I do want to say that the “system” finds it important that the father PAY his support. It does not care whether the children benefit from their father's presence.

When we divorced my wife was earning three times my salary, the money was not what mattered to her. When she left town with the kids some 18 months later she didn’t bother giving neither me, nor Family Court her new address. I asked Family Court if they would help me find my children so I could start my visits again. That wasn’t their problem, but, when I would find it they wanted the address! The payment checks were being returned and they didn’t really know what to do with them.

Do you really think such a “system” could be changed?

Date: April 09, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I am not a divorced dad and god i hope i never am.
In my line of work Divorce is a major problem,i'm
a Firefighter and some of the things that have happened to most of the fathers that i know are
very sad to say the least. I have just read the latest Readers Digest (Deadbeat Dads) and with some of the things that are said in there it should be sent to anyone and everyone that can read. This article should be sent to every Judge,Lawyer and Political person with influence in the country.
Thank You
Jeff

Date: April 09, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I would have to begin by saying that "Deadbeat Dad" is not totally a myth. Divorced for 9 years I am faced with one of those deadbeats and have recieved little to practically nil for support for our two children since the divorce.

I have been in a relationship with an excellent Dad of three children for the past three years. It angers me to watch him and other divorced fathers I know, struggle to meet the unfair load their child support puts upon them. He was basically homeless for 2 years after the divorce due to unfair division of assets and debt. How does this fit with the divorce laws declaration that each partner, and the children should enjoy the same quality of life they did when married.He didn't even have a proper home to bring the children to! It does not matter that a year and a half of disability lowered his income, or that her income has increased by approximately 500% since the divorce! Without enough money to go back to court to claim unneccesary hardship he must continue to struggle to keep his head above water, while the debt load slowly drowns him.
Our judicial system also encourages divorced mothers to look to welfare, and demand more support, rather than work for a living and be self sufficient. The increase in tax revenue the government has seen through the new child support laws disallowing fathers to claim support payments, must surely be quickly eaten up by the burden of welfare, and social assistance the system creates!

Date: April 09, 2001
Name:

Comments:

Howdy:
Wanted to add my two cents to what will probably more of a novel than a digest for a future issue.
I have been separated/then divorced for more than 6 years, I have never missed a payment and paid before the courts told me to.
I have my kids over virtually every weekend. At first it was a financial thing,"If you don't take them, I'll make you pay more". Now, and before , I just wanted them in my life. They are mine too, and I want to watch them grow, ride a bike for the first time, catch a baseball, or hear the words, "I love you, dad".
In '99, I was audited by the government for what I thought was the fact they didn't believe I paid support. I submitted what I thought was required and waited patiently for the process of government to respond. When I did my taxed for 2000, I was informed I could no longer deduct child support for '00 or '99. I have a bill from each year totalling $2000 each. How will I ever make that up. My ex as well, no longer has to claim the money I give her.
It will take forever to get out of this mess. You may think I earn a lot but my support has been based on three jobs, one full time, one part time and one I use vacation time to work for so I can take my kids to see their relatives.
As for my lawyer, he can afford another monogrammed shirt, but it would have cost a bundle every time he opened his mouth to persue something.
As for a loan, I am fortunate to have got one from our campus credit union, but when I tried before, I could not get a loan since my name was on the matrimonial property(which my downpayment got us into) because my debt load was too high. So I signed over the house, did not recieve a penny, and was told I no longer had collateral for the loan. Is that a lose/lose, or is it me.
I would not give up the relation with my kids for any thing in the world, they keep me going. Its unfortunate now , that I just work to keep busy, cuz the money will just fly away anyway. Lately if I'm not real busy or with my kids or on my computer, I fall back to the realization of reality, and get incredibly depressed.
Finally, I might add I was replaced in the house, I moved out , the ex's boyfriend moved in, I don't care about a lot about what happened , I just wish I wasn't considered the bad guy.
I would also like to have two nickels to rub together when the kids come to visit. I like to do things with them and in this society, it costs money.
They may not be the best input for your publication, but I was at the doctors today and read the article in the digest. Instead of thinking alot of things out , I just let it flow out of my fingers. Yeah, I'm still bitter and venting, and don't even ask about my dating scenario.....
Cheers folks...thanks for the ears..

Date: April 09, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I think all to often spouses use the court system and their children to get even with each other. Your article on dead-beat Dads proves my point. Many times all that is wanted is to suck as much out of a man as possible and in the mean time deny them access or visitation with their kids. It's time that adults start acting like adults and start treating each other with a little dignity and respect - you'd be surprised the lasting effects this will have on the children. Children do not ask to be brought into the messes that adults create. The healthiest kids I've seen from divorce are the children that were put ahead of the adults anger & hurt, with the kid's interest first.

Date: April 09, 2001
Name:

Comments:

What can I say that hasn't already been said? I too have gone through every imaginable horror of a relationship breakdown. It appears that if you want to be a judge in a divorce proceeding or a politition making up laws pertaining to separation, divorce, support and access the first thing you have to do is lose all your common sense!
The hardest thing for me was to lose the relationship I had with my kids. I was never denied access (technically) however, the condition of my kids spending time with me was "if they wanted to". The conditioning of my children’s feeling toward me was not subtle. And any indication by them wanting to visit me was greeted with dire and lasting consequenses. Despite not being able to see them for about 5 years I always believed that one day when they were old enough things would change. They did! On her sixteenth birthday my eldest child ran away from her mothers house. Twin #1 came to live with me when she was 15 and twin#2 came 6 months later.
They are all grown now and living on their own and they are nice girls, but I fear that the time spent in a home that was not focused toward loving and nurturing them has left its emotional scars, and I fear for their future relationships.
I know all about the injustices that occur and I support all people who are going through hard times. For me there was a sense of triumph by hanging in there and always behaving with integrity and dignity. In the end I got my Kids back, and that is what was important to me. If their is a message in that it is hang in there guys and always act in a manner so that you can meet anyone, hold your head high and look them in the eyes.

I would suggest that if anyone knows of a lobby group who can apply pressure to make changes in our present system that they post it. And I would hope that readers digest would list it for informational content with this article.

Date: April 09, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I feel sorry that some fathers have been placed in an unfitting category. However, I am also aware of the great lengths that some men will go to in order to mask their true incomes. My child's father has spent thousands of dollars trying to convince the courts that he is poor. He owns his own company, drives an expensive car, and lives in a $200,000 home. I on the other hand, make minimum wage, drive a vehicle that's on its last legs, and have had to move back in with my parents to ensure that I can properly care for my daughter. He now owes thousands in back support. Where are the strict enforcement laws that are supposed to help us "unsympathetic" custodial parents?

Date: April 09, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I believe the majority of divorced fathers get a raw deal. The courts almost always side with the mother - no matter what!!! I am married to a man who is divorced and paying child support in the amount of $900.00 per month. This is 50% of his net pay, or in other words, every other week, his income goes to her!!! I wouldn't mind so much if things were fair - but they are not! The kids wish to live with us. However, every lawyer that we have contacted has advised us AGAINST trying to get custody (the mother now has full custody). Apparently, it will cost us a small fortune in court fees and she can drag it out as long as possible. Where is the justice int hat?

Now, I also have seen this from the other side. I too am divorced and receive support for one child. Up until recently, I was receiving $400 per month - but luckily, I have an amicable relationship with my ex-husband. In fact, we are better friends now than ever. We are the EXCEPTION, rather than the rule. I recently REDUCED (yes reduced!) the amount to $260.00 Now, he doesn't deduct it and I don't claim it. It helps me in my tax situation and frees up more cash for him every month. I believe in being fair. Too bad more ex-wives didn't think this way.

The only way this will change is when the courts view fathers as PARENTS and not just a bank account or second income for manipulative, lying ex-wives.

Just because couples fail in their marriage, doesn't mean that they have to fail as parents.

IT IS TIME TO PUT KIDS FIRST!!! LISTEN TO THEIR VOICES!!!

Date: April 09, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I think the majority of divorced fathers get taken advantage of. They have to pay 3/4 of their earnings, and they may or may not get to see the children or have any say. It is the greedy mothers who don't care for the children's emotional state that are to blame.
I have an ex who is a real deadbeat dad, he has never paid child support, he can use his money for drugs or alcohol but never his children. I let my children see their father until the time where it became emotionally damaging for them. Just before the time I said no more, the children chose to sever contact. It was a very difficult time and even though he was and is a terrible father, the choices were made for the children.
They are much happier right now, and he has not seen them for 4 years, which is his punishment. He chose what kind of father he wanted to be and in the end he has nothing.
Punish the right fathers and give the good fathers who are trying a chance. It would be wonderful if he could afford to do the same things with the kids that his ex-wife can afford to do on his money. A loving father who is trying to support his children should not have to live in poverty because he has them. Love food and shelter is still the main priorities for everyone. Not the thousands of dollars the exwives need for themselves. They are just as responsible to support the children. What ever happened to equal rights. Why is the father the only person who is supposed to support the children? If both parents had to support the children, all of them could have a life worth living. Fathers can't even buy a birthday present for the child because all of their money has gone for support. The courts have to learn to be reasonable, and why do only 5% of fathers with custody get support from the ex wives. Something seems pretty unfair.
Ladies get a job, and help out. You weren't born to sit around and live off everyone else. It sure would be nice if I could have done that too, but then how would my daughters grow up to be decent people. I chose to have them and I have the responsibility to raise and support them.
Most divorced fathers love and support their children, don't take away their life just so you can have a new car etc.
They owe you as much as you owe them for a failed relationship, why do the have to suffer for the rest of their life and not be able to enjoy their children without a big dark cloud over them.
To all real deadbeat dads and greedy mothers, you are the problem with our society. The children learn from you and I pity them and their future.
Whatever happened to love, commitment, understanding and being fair.

Date: April 09, 2001
Name: Catherine Woods

Comments:
I believe that it is too easy for parents to walk out on their families. It is because of this that children find themselves in horrendous situations, and parents end up with an inadequate amount of money to support either themselves, or themselves and their children. I believe that marriage is a contract, and that no-one has a right to break that contract. Although there are a number of dysfunctional people out there, counselling is available, and if we really cared about the well-being of our children, we would do everything in our power to "make it work". I also believe that bringing children into the world is a responsibiltiy that should not be taken lightly. No-one can do an adequate job of "parenting", on a part-time basis. We owe it to our children, our future, to force deadbeat parents into assuming the responsibility that they willingly and knowingly took on. This would make a lot of the money issues, non-issues. I also think that the increase in morality, (stop adulterous relationships), would go along way in improving many of the ills in society today.

Date: April 09, 2001
Name:

Comments:
No, I don't believe that divorced dads get a raw deal, generally. I believe that spouses, who walk out on their families, for either an adulterous relationship, or for other reasons, have all of the power according to our judicial system, and the victims of these horrendous situations, namely the children, find themselves in a fragile state, because of their shattered world. To add insult to injury, the court grants these parents the "right", to haul the children out of their homes on a biweekly basis, (often to be with inappropriate third parties), which serves only to disrupt the secure world that once existed for them, and leaves these children in a constant state of turmoil. Children need roots, stability and a safe place to grow up. Juggling children between two homes, and forcing them away from their friends and familiar surroundings, only messess kids up. As a teacher in the elementary school system for nearly two decades, it has been my experience, with children from single parent homes, that the most well-adjusted kids, are those in which the children have minimal contact with the parent who walked out. The children that I have had the most difficulty with, behaviourally, have been children who are forced to go to a parents new home on alternate weekends. It is also incredibly easy to see which weekend a child has been able to stay home based on his/her behaviour on Monday morning.

As far as the responsibility for the cost of post-secondary education, a parent who abandons their family, is also taking valuable assets from the family, minimizing the single parent's ability to provide for the children for their post-secondary education. I will be reliant on the equity I have built up over the years, and what I have managed to salvage from the divorce, to provide for my children for their education. Had their father chosen to accept the responsibility and commitment into which he entered freely, we would have had a much greater means to adequately support them, as he would not have been supporting someone else's spouse and child.

This was his choice. We were not even afforded a vote.

Date: April 09, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
IT MAKES ME VERY ANGRY NOW THAT I AM EXPERIENCING A SITUATION WITH AFRIEND THAT THIS IS HAPPENING. HIS WIFE LEFT HIM, SHE HAS THE KIDS, HE PAYS CHILD SUPPORT REGULARLY AND GETS TREATED AS THOUGH HE IS THE "BAD GUY." I DO NOT THINK IT FAIR THAT THESE LAWS AND RULES ARE STILL IN EFFECT WHEN TIMES HAVE CHANGED!!! IT SEEMS AS THOUGH THE RULES WERE PUT INTO PLACE YEARS AGO WHEN THE MOM WAS AT HOME, THE DAD DECIDED TO LEAVE AND SHE WAS LEFT WITH NO WAY TO SUPPORT THE FAMILY SINCE SHE WAS AT HOME TAKING CARE OF THE HOUSE AND KIDS WHILE HE "WON THE BREAD!" PATHETIC THAT THE GOVERNMENT HAS NOT TAKEN THE TIME TO UPDATE LAWS AND RULES THAT HAVE LONG AGO GONE BAD. WHAT IS A GUY TO DO WHEN HE IS ALONE, PAYING A GOOD PORTION OF HIS INCOME TO THE MOM FOR HIS KIDS, AND SHE RECEIVES A GOOD INCOME OF HER OWN, HER NEW MAN RECEIVES A GOOD INCOME AND HE IS LEFT TO FEND FOR HIMSELF BECAUSE HE CERTAINLY DOESN'T HAVE THE GOVERNMENT ON HIS SIDE!

Date: April 09, 2001
Name: Cindy McMaster

Comments:
Never before has an article in the Readers Digest angered me more. The article is an emotional outburst lacking in statistics. If the Readers Digest wants to present an article on Child Support in Canada, why not find an author that is willing to research the facts? The fact of the matter is that approximately 50% of marriages now end in divorce. Of that 50%, traditionally, most of the children are being raised by their mothers. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that when one person leaves a marriage that is a sudden drop in income of at least 50%. Why should children suffer a loss of income because the parents are no longer married?
Give us the statistics, by province, from the Maintenance Enforcement Offices.
1. How many cases do they have on file
2. How many maintenance payments are payable to mothers?
3. How many cases (and include a dollar amount) of maintenance that is in arrears
4. How much is spent each year enforcing maintenance orders?
5. The success rate in collecting maintenance
6. Give us the average income of a single parent family.
7. How many of these families live on welfare?
8. Give us a realistic amount that it costs to raise a child per year. A pair of jeans can cost anywhere from $20.00 to $100.00. A pair of running shoes the same. Rent, electricity, groceries, gas, vehicle payments, medicine, glasses, dental, hot dog days, hockey, dancing, babysitting, the list goes on and on.

Date: April 09, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Yes, fathers do get a raw deal. I am one of those dads that doesnt have a problem with paying support,but,I just can' understand why child support is based on total income.It should be based on the base income, because if I want to work overtime so that I can make ends meet a little easier,why should I have to pay that much more for child support.Its like maybe us men are better off to do no O/T, but then we have no money to actually live and do other things with our kids.Also, I feel that the womens salary should be taken into consideration.

Date: April 09, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I'm going through this with a DEADBEAT DAD and i feel if they can buy drugs, alcohol, etc, they should pay, but if they are trying to make ends meet and still see there kids and don't abandon them then they should get a break.

Date: April 09, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I too have thought about suicide. With the insurance that I carry I'm worth more dead than alive. With me gone my child would still be well off financially. On a gross salary of about $800 weekly I pay $310 to my ex for my child. And this has been going on now for over 5 years. The devorce laws in Quebec give women the right to "have their cake and eat it too". A woman must find herself a job within a reasonable amount of time. There are as many interpretations of what is a reasonable amount of time as there are divorced women, and at $310 a week alimony, what incentive is there for her to find a job.
In your story Myth of the Deadbeat Dad there are comments about what should be done and that the courts are not "living in the reality of things". Are judges that stupid not to see what is going on. And if the government is going to rake in a billion dollars with C-41, what insentive is there for the government to change anything.
I don't think that there's a month that goes by that Readers Digest doesn't carry something on the subject and still not much gets done.
In the mean time 85 to 91% of us divorced dads will continue to pay, and pay, and pay...........

Date: April 09, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I know it is very frustrating dealing with the courts and child support. I know there are federal guidelines for child support verses income. It would be much better to base support on this with mandatory yearly submission of gross personal income info from Revenue Canada. You could even have an online form for both parties to check, ie if income is this and you live in this province with this number of kids then you pay this amount.
I went to court to try to get a court order for access to my child after my ex denied me access, even though an agreement that we made in court was in place which is somehow different than an order. The judge made some judgements about me and my character yet I could not open my mouth as the judge said it wasn't the proper form. Her derision against me was based on submissions by my ex's lawyer. I got my court order but I had no respect for the judge making one sided statements without giving me the opportunity to defend myself.
The judge just told my ex that she shouldn't deny access.
Oh well.

Date: April 09, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I can sympathize and empathize with these stories , as I have seen both sides of this issue . I do believe the government needs to change many of the rules and regulations . In Ontario , the FRO was formed to help collect funds for custodial parents from non custodial parents that were possibly in arrears . The government then decided that all cases going through court had to go forth through the FRO , wether they were paying "on time every time " or in arrears . This action allows the FRO to project higher numbers of collections on time , as it is a small percentage of actual cases that go into arrears . In a sence making false claims , and wasting tax payers money . Why should a case that has always been paid on time every time suddenly have to be put through the FRO , there by wasting tax funds . The FRO itself needs to better train their staff , and have more staff on hand so recipients or payors dont have to spend 2 or 3 hours trying to get through to the 1800 phone number to find its busy , or put on hold to be disconnected . The staff can be quite rude . I once called at christmas a few years ago to finally be connected after sitting on hold for 45 minutes to find no person on the other end . I listened closely to hear 2 voices talking about how slow a day they were having , etc ... then suddenly a mans voice came on saying hello (realizing i had heard ) and apologizing .

Date: April 08, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Dear Readers Digest:

It is without an ounce of doubt that Canada's record with relation to the treatment accorded non-custodial parents is closer than that offered to people of the Jewish faith during Hitler's regeime. The country desperately needs to revamp its position taken towards non-custodial parents and the desperate measures they take to collect child-support when a person just cannot pay. We could tell you stories including our own that would literally blow the lid off any persons preconceived notion that we live in a democracy.

For quite some time now there have been paying parents coast to coast who have chosen to commit suicide as an alternative to going broke. The problem here is that these deaths go in large part unnoticed. It is a travesty that such unnecessary and preventable deaths even have to take place at all and the authorities who played a part in pushing such people into positions of such despair should be ashamed of themselves.

Let's hope that many more non-custodial parents (mainly fathers) do not have to parish before these overzealous individuals who run this country realize that there is indeed a problem and take the necessary steps to reform our family law record.

Date: April 08, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Yes, divorced fathers often get a raw deal!
It is common now that if a father seeks custody of the children, with the support of a favorable professional family assessment towards the father for custody, the mother can make false child sexual assault accusations against the father that "will" be dealt with by the courts. Thus gaining immediate child custody along with substantial support payments. When the charges are finally dealt with through the court system and found to be false, a year later, along with being estranged from his children, he has to start the fight all over again just for some access to his children. The system stinks! As one that has been through the ringer, I haven’t had a relationship with my children for some 10 yrs. Oh yes, I still pay support!

Date: April 08, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I applaud the article on divorced fathers. My husband and myself are before the courts at present because his ex-wife requires more child support. I will expand my comments when this court case is resloved and will definitely get on the band wagon to change the existing laws. The pendulum has swung and it's a bad time to be a divorced DAD. Keep writing articles as such and contact me if I can help.

Date: April 08, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I feel like I'm one of the lucky ones, if there is such a thing in this kind of situation, my ex-wife and I have mantained a certain kind of friendship mainly because of our children. The worst part of our seperation was the fact that the lawyers wanted us to hate each other and go for the throat. We were in agreement to a settlement but the lawyers would have none of that. In fact her lawyer approached her saying now that we have the child support in place we will now hit him for spousal support, which she didn't want, her lawyer said 'It is your God given RIGHT to recieve that money.'

Date: April 08, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I separated from my common-law spouse when our children were 6 and 4 years old. We split our property down the middle and wrote up an agreement between ourselves that the best interest of the children was our priority and that we would both be involved in the decision making of the raising financially, medically, spiritually and otherwise. We agreed on joint custody. We have tried several versions of who goes where what week and we had to communicate the children's happiness or unhappiness in a give situation and ensure the kids weren't playing one parent against the other.

Over the years we have found it necessary to agree to disagree and not discuss anything further until emotions have settled down. In the initial break-up, I did not even consider asking for any monetary support or alimony as I made more than the children's father and I saw myself in the same position he was. It never occurred to me to demand money for grocery, rent, etc. for the children because my ex-spouse had the same expenses I did. We both kept track of what we spent on the children for extra-curricular activities, medical and clothing and again split the cost down the middle. I would usually end up paying the initial cost and submit a spreadsheet with the totals and breakdown of who owes what. My ex would then add (or subtract) items that he had paid for. We have both kept receipts but we have yet to scrutinize them because we don't have any interest in ripping each other off or putting the relationship we have for caring for our children in jeopardy.

Over the years that my ex-spouse and I have been separated we have logically and rationally decided all aspects of the children's lives. I believe our children are happier and healthier (mentally) because of this. My ex-spouse is now married again and when we have a family decision to make, his wife is included in the decision making process. Anything that has to do with the kids affects her life also.

In your article I was appalled at the atrocity of the man who had to pay over $7000 per month, to support his ex-wife and children in the style that they were accustomed to. If the husband dies without insurance would the government continue to support them in the style they are accustomed to. I believe the amount allocated for child expenses should be the same as what the government is willing to pay in welfare for the same children. I also believe that today the only way alimony should even be allowed is if the wife is truly dependent, i.e. the wife never had a outside paying job in the relationship the whole time of the marriage. In some cases where the wife is the one who is filing for divorce there is no way she should be able to get alimony, especially if she is living with someone else.

Date: April 08, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I couldn’t finish reading your article on "Dead beat Dad's" in one sitting. It brought back too many reminders of my situation nine years ago. The ex-wife denying access to the children, the biased court system, the legal bills, the discriminatory and illogical methods to calculate child support, the intimidation from lawyers and the Family Responsibility Office. Reading the responses to the articles, it appears nothing has changed. My “children” are a 15-year-old son and a 19-year-old daughter. I have always lived up to my court ordered responsibilities. What responsibility is ordered on the custodial parent ensuring that non-custodial parent continues to be a vital part of the child’s life. None.
The custodial parent wields far too much power and influence in these situations. Our adversarial legal system places children in situations where they must choose between the two parents. The custodial parent is the primary provider for the children. If this parent demonstrates any negativity toward the non-custodial parent, the children are going to emulate that attitude. Under these circumstances, asking a child if they would like to visit their Dad, in all likelihood, would result in a no.

I

The present system needs a dramatic overhaul. There are no checks and balances to ensure children are not pitted against their parents. Take the process out of the courts. Parents aren’t criminals and the money saved can be used for the children rather than lining high priced lawyer’s pockets. For those who attempt to manipulate accessibility to the children, associate access to support payments. No access, no support. The Family Responsibility Office should only be used in situations where it has been proven there is a need for support enforcement. This costly, overpowered government initiative is, for many, an offensive waste of taxpayer’s money.

The children’s interests can be better served when adults negotiate in an environment that fosters cooperation. This is the system every Canadian Citizen should demand.

Date: April 08, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I myself have been through a divorce during the last two years. And know first hand that father's are getting a raw deal. My ex has tried every possible way to remove me from my child's life, which has cost me thousands of dollars in legal fees. Her lies have put my in jail and removed my daughter from me each and every time. After the investgations, Family Services, as well as the RCMP have proven that she lied. But the courts, family services, and the RCMP wont charge her as i was told it might make "other woman" afraid to come forward. I was told by Family Services that even though they know she is lying, they have to act on a complaint because of protocol.

I have always paid my support payments on time. Yet i'am continuely harrassed by my ex wife in regards to my child.

I am not in agreement to being forced to pay for my child attending school after the age of 18. When a couple's child has reached the age of 18 and the child wants to attend college or university, the couple enroll the child into a program that they can afford. But with the law and how it works now, a father has to pay for the schooling and support even though he can't afford it.

We as fathers are forced into bankrupcy and forced to live a life of poverty. I myself cannot afford to buy my child toys or games because of my financial condition.

I myself live in a tiny two room apartment while my ex and child live in a $150,000 home free of financial hardship.

I am all for supporting my child. I have supported my child before the divorce, and still live a comforable life. I support my child after the divorce, and live in poverty now.

Date: April 08, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I think Bill C-41 is heavily balanced against paying fathers. Canadians as a whole are already sufocated by taxes and this doesn't just isn't fair for some fathers who are at as much fault of breaking up with their spouses as their spouses themselves. After all I am talking on behalf of the vast majority of fathers who pay or at least try very hard to do so.
Deciding what somebody should pay based on gross income is just plain nuts. It's not about how much he gets paid but how much he has left after paying rent, buying food, paying debts, etc.
A man who is not just tring to evade paying child support should not be forced to live in a degrating way.
My question is: Does anybody make sure the parent on the receiving end spends the money for the children? Because I know a lot of women who use the money to buy luxurious stuff for themselves. Now I'm not saying that's what they all do but some people think that paying fathers are money flushing machines.

Date: April 08, 2001
Name:

Comments:
It is absolutely appalling that regardless of gender, men and women are driven to acts of despair in attempts to rightfully and properly parent their children. There is no doubt in my mind that many men have and continue to shrug their financial and emotional responsibilities of their children. Unfortunately, there are many decent men who are currently paying a very high price for the present position of the political perception pendulum with regard to shared parenting and child support.
I chose to end my short-lived marriage because my wife and myself were both miserable and being together promoted a negative environment for our then infant daughter. My wife and I had already attempted marriage counselling. Since separating, I have dealt with many professionals while attempting to have equally-shared parenting of my child. I have found that with all professionals, regardless of whether they are therapists, doctors, lawyers, mediators or childcare workers, I must prove myself innocent of not being a deadbeat dad. My motivation for wanting equally-shared parenting with my ex-spouse, who has an income equal to my own, is first viewed as scapecoating my financial obligations rather than a desire for quality time with each parent, reduced transition periods between households and balanced lifestyles.
Even with child support payments of a modest $500.00 per month, this represents (tax free) over $120,000.00 during the the span of a child's dependent and educational years. Regardless of how noble and amicable we wish our ex-spouses to be, the financial incentive to be adversarial and aggressive in divorce court is easy to comprehend. The advise I received from one succesful family lawyer was, "Forget about fair, just swallow it and try and have the best relationship you can with your child."

Date: April 07, 2001
Name: Fathers Are Capable Too

Comments:
Fathers Are Capable Too: Parenting Association is an Ontario registered non-profit organization of men and women who are advocates for the rights of children. Primarily the right of children to have equal access to both parents after separation or divorce and to maintain a meaningful relationship
with both parents.

Fathers Are Capable Too: Parenting Association
3044 Bloor Street West, Suite 205
Toronto, Ontario
M8X 2Y8
Phone: 416-410-FACT
Website: www.fact.on.ca

Date: April 07, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Fathers are getting a raw deal. My family has dealt with nothing but problems concerning a child born out of wedlock. The mother of this child is very spiteful and always threatens the father with going to court. He already pays her plenty, and none of the money seems to go to the child. Now the child is to come and live with her father and his family and the mother says she won't pay him a cent! She always wins...how fair is that? He's a great dad, and has always been there for his child. He should have more rights.

Date: April 07, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I would like to rebut your April's article about "Dead Beat Dad's". You paint a ugly picture or these men, that's for sure. How about an article about the Mother that was with these "Dead Beat Dad's". Don't quote things that happen in Wisconsin, as the States are on a totally different system than ours. For these men that are left "with only $ 302 a month to live" probably was behind years in child support that he was docked over and above. Men feel they can walk away from most relationships without looking behind financially from day one. Then by the time it goes to court 3-4 years later (litterally, I know, we've been there) they do owe amazing amounts of back pay plus ongoing support payments. I do not understand how a man can just up and leave the family unit, usually with 2-3 children behind, and expect the woman to just pick up the pieces, which the woman has no other choice. The man has left with his larger income earning paychque, but that mortgage payment is still due in 20 days and ticking. The children get sick and need medicine, clothing etc. Most women make far less income than a man, and with this they are expecte to keep up with the high family lifestyle of rent, or be forced to move into a two bedroom apartment, or a more expensive three bedroom if the children are boys an girls. We have to keep paying the credit cards, all utilites etc that were accumulated by the man, although the men walk out and don't pay. (don't get me wrong, I'm sure some maybe even most do) Most women after paying for a roof over their heads, utilities and the necessity of food only have pennies to rub together, and that is if they have that. The men only have to worry about themselves. The women have to look into the eyes of their children each and every day and explain why they're hungry.
My suggestion to those men who choose to keep their support payments to an affordable monthly payment, is to keep up with the payments from the day they walk away from the relationship. Then there won't be years of back pay to make up for and then they can afford their rightful duty to help support the children they helped bring into this world. Why should we make it 'easy' for the men to walk away without a second thought of responsibility??

Date: April 07, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
With both of my husbands I have seen the burden been of them to prove why they need reduced payments when their income goes down.

There never was the need for either of the mothers to gain employment as recently as three years ago.

I believe very strongly that mothers cannot claim that they are entitled to ailmony as they can always find gainful employment if they choose to go to school or gain it through experience.

I should know as I have raised my family as best as I could when the father moved to avoid payments and it was no longer worth the stress or pain of continuing to figt any more for the financial support.

I have seen my husband's RRSP seized without notification after he had sucessfully won the case of no support without access.

We were never notified of any court orders ordering payment.

Over the last three years EI and income tax refunds have been garnished for child support.

We have tried to get the court order from Justice Canada but have been unable to obtain any information by telephone.

Date: April 07, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Thanks to our Government, the ramifications of a failed relationship is acting as a strong deterent for people who wish to commit to each other. I have been victim to ridiculos situations that have effected my life. These situations make a person feel totally helpless; That it makes no sense in the mind of any reasonable thinking person, only makes the feeling of helplesness even worse. I would love to se a national fund created with the sole purpose of suing our government for pain and suffering.

Date: April 06, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I always thought any father who did not pay their court ordered child support payments was a deadbeat dad.

My opinion has changed 180% since reading this article. I now see the other side of the story, which I had definitely not seen before.

Date: April 06, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
My husband divorced his wife of two years. They had one child together and for the first year or so my new husband and myself raised her while her mother got on her feet. We never asked for any child support from her mother feeling that we couldn't put a price on the care of a child and we weren't having any difficulty supporting her ourselves. Three years later after her mother was done school and had a job, a house, and a new car she took over full time care of the child because her work hours made it much easier for child care then my husbands hours. The mother came to my husband shortly after that and said that she had contacted a lawyer and we would have to pay $350 a month in child support to her. This women makes several thousand dollars more a month than my husband and I make but in the eyes of the law that doesn't matter as the child is his he must pay his share. My husband and I have other children of our own and put together they don't cost that much. We did finally convince her that we couldn't possibly afford such high payments and she agreed but we live in fear of a letter from her lawyer everytime we buy something. We make the child support payments with the Child Tax Benefit cheques we receive every month for the other two children. How can the powers that be sleep at night when they make one child suffer for the sake of giving another $100 running shoes? Mothers of divorce are never treated this way the system needs to take a look at the real cost of providing for a child not making life cushy for the mother.

Date: April 06, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
YES, I THINK THE CURRENT LEGISLATION PUTS MOST FATHERS IN AN IMPOSSIBLE POSITION, ESPECIALLY THE POOR ONES. WHY IS THE GARNISHED AMOUNT NOT DEDUCTABLE WHEN THE WOMEN CAN BENEFIT FROM ITS NON-TAXABLE STATUS? THE 'SHARED PARENTING' ACT MUST BE LOOKED INTO IMMEDIATELY, BECAUSE THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT THE CHILDREN BEAR THE BRUNT OF THE WHOLE UNHAPPY SITUATION.

Date: April 06, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I witnessed first hand the devastation wrought by the justice system. My husbands previous marriage produced 2 children. Because he is not a "fighter" he allowed his ex to walk all over him and the courts finished him off. He gave up his home which was mortgage free in a verbal agreement then she took him to court and the cleaners at the same time. The amount left over after child support would barely feed him let alone house him. She even ultimately tried to attach my income. Meanwhile she has remarried and lives very well and has made visits with the children so uncomfortable with my husband that he eventually gave up seeing them. After years and endless amounts spent on lawyers we are disillusioned but obvoiusly not the only ones. Your story shows that my husband is one of the "lucky ones". The despair didn't kill him!!!

Date: April 06, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I believe that each case is different. I also believe that it has to be realistic. The fathers have to survive also. There is to much emphasis on the money part and not enough on the well beings of the children! It is just a big money grab for the lawyers!

Date: April 06, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Finally an article that attempts to set the record straight. I might be divorced but certainly far from being a deadbeat dad and I despise such a label. I love my 2 children dearly and have never shirked responsibility.

I have come to realize that no matter how hard I try and no matter how hard I work, I cannot get ahead because of choking child support payments.

Recently my company had to pay me for unused vacation time I had accumulated. Why had it accumulated ? Because I could not afford to take a vacation unlike my ex. But the money I did receive in lieu of vacation had to be shared with her. Thats the very reason I was unable to take a vacation on the first place.

Furthermore, during downsizing I was laid off and received a severence package. I had hoped that this money could be used as a downpayment toward
a small house but again, no. I had to cough up a lump sum. This after paying about $1000/mo in regular child support.

I will remain as I now am existing...in a one bedroom apartment, gainfully employed and in close contact with my two children...but enough is enough....I truly understand the feelings of depression, despndency, and helplessness. Thank you for a well written article.

Date: April 06, 2001
Name: Frank H. Lucianovich

Comments:
This is the most thorough condemnation of our system of higher learning that one could assemble.
What exactly is the point of this learning and education if practical every day common sense and justice itself, are as secondary and seemingly abstract to the process the article so well defines? There is nothing in this account of the all too common events to recommend the "system" as being either realistic or humane.

Date: April 06, 2001
Name:

Comments:
As an older woman who has been there I disagree with the tone of the article. As it talks about the living standard of the father if fails to mention the poor living standard of the mother left to support their children. Too many men go back to school, quit higher paying jobs, take sick leave, retire, or take money under the table all to reduce their income or make it look lower. Your article represents a minority of men. The majority of divorced women have the chidren and the responsibility of most of their financial needs.
Note the tone of most of the men writng, very militant.

Date: April 06, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I believe from what I've experienced and seen, for every legit "unable to pay father" out there, there is just as many "deadhead fathers" that just won't pay because they don't want to take responsiblity for their children.
What parents need to realize is that child support is not just about money...it is support for the child's welfare, health, social, and academic skills.
A child needs guidance, and sometimes it takes more than just a mother or just a father to do that. I think every child should have the shared upbringing of both loving parents. I just wish that people would think about how they are hurting their children and take that responsiblity.

Date: April 06, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
More needs to be done by the courts to mandate marriage councelling so that the family does not break up. It is the break-up of the family that is causuing a lot of the poverty and hatred in Canada and other countries. Lets look to the source rather than bandaging the break.

Date: April 05, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I believe there are just as many fathers getting a raw deal as there are fathers who live up to their obligations re child support. In the case of my ex, who fathered a child with his first wife, I seriously believe that had she not taken him to court and had support for their child deducted from his wages re the Family Support Plan, she would not have seen five cents. On the other hand, in the case of my daughter's father, he has always paid his support--with no intrusions from any courts--as well as offered assistance over and above his support payments. It works both ways; unfortunately, for the 'good' fathers, they suffer brutally in court because of the 'bad' fathers.

Date: April 05, 2001
Name: Glenda Patrick

Comments:
Finally, someone has taken the lead in writing about this very important issue. A small group of us in Grande Prairie, Alberta are fighting for father's rights in regard to this matter and your article unbelievably dealt with the same issues we had outlined in an editorial we tried to submit to the Local paper. They did print a shorter version of the article, however it took away all the important factors you mentioned. It is unbelievable how the government is treating fathers today and we are fighting to make change.

I could go on and on because the whole issue infuriates me. I would like permission from Donna Lafromboise to send this article up to the Minister of Justice's office along with our concerns. You wonder if they even get off their high horses long enough to see the devastation that is happening to fathers all over the world. There is only a small group of us, but we will not stop trying to get the word out as you have done on the injustice to fathers and hopefully someone out there will finally listen. We are talking about politicians so it could take a while. I would also like to send your article to the Law Professors who are teaching new lawyers and the the MLA's. We also are going to try to send to a handful of judges within the province.

Thank you so much for an excellent, excellent article. It felt so good to see there was someone out there who felt that same way as us and took the time to research and write about it. I can't thank you enough.

We would be willing to talk more about the subject at any time.

Glenda Patrick

Date: April 05, 2001
Name:

Comments:
All I know at present is our own situation. My husband to be has been almost defeated, he has talked to me of how he feels worthless and used and has even had thoughts of suicide.
His ex wife handed him two black garbage bags of his clothes, and said I want you to leave, I am not satisfied with our marraige.
Now there are four kids involved here, and a father who was devastated by being literally thrown out, seperated from his kids, which I might add, he was totally involved with.
In fact the two older children, still talk of how Daddy combed their hair, ironed their clothes, played house with them, went to the park , made their favourite meals, bathed them, walked to school with them on his off shift or afternoon shift , he volunteered in their classes, to be told OUT.

Hopefully one day, the courts will wake up, and see that you can't call every father and mother a dead beat, as there are a few of us out there, that love our families, and are willing to do our best for them without taking the experience of life from them, or make others pay for our own inadequacies and mistakes.
Personal responsiblity is what we are teaching our kids.

Date: April 05, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I would like to see an article on deadbeat mothers. My husband has not missed one child support payment to his ex. When they split, she received half of the assets, her amount totaling $100,000.00. She managed to spend the total amount in the space of one year with nothing to show for it. She has not worked in ten years, even though she is healthy and the kids are in school all day, so it is not as if she has to be at home with them. I believe that a man should help support his children, the key word here being help. Shouldn't the mother be expected to contribute also?

Date: April 05, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
For the past 15yrs, I have paid child support for one child. With COLA increases it now amounts to some $700/month. I write 12 post-dated cheques and courier them to my ex-wife.
From the very beginning she made access difficult and once, at a cost of over $3000, I had to go to court for access. I won but I lost. The situation became impossible so I backed off and have not seen my son for a number of years. My lawyer has cautioned me about all the "evil" things that will befall me if I stop support payments.
NOW I HAVE A REAL PROBLEM FROM WHICH, UNDER THE PRESENT SYSTEM, THERE IS NO APPARENT RELIEF. Over a year ago I was diagnosed with "treatment resistant major depression" and I have not been able to work since. In 2000 I had no taxable income yet continued to pay support. I have a small disability pension and cannot predict when I might return to work. Again, my lawyer has cautioned me to keep the payments flowing. The cards are stacked against any payor (usually Dad) and the system is unbending.
I can take a little solice from the fact there is only a few more years to go.

Date: April 05, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I read the article and I realize that there are always 2 sides to a story. My story is simple, I was married for over 15 years and have 2 beautiful children. I love them and I always will because thats what a father does. I don't have access to them and have never been told why! I pay my support and when I recently changed work I ran into some short term financial problems. I missed a few months and yes I am responsible for all payments. I was greeted one morning by an officer that I didn't have a license and that there were impounding my car. All I have ever wanted was to see my kids and be a part of their life. I have never questioned what the mother does with the money I send. She remarried and even though there life is good, she denies me any access. I have not rocked the boat because I believe the kids will see the truth one day. I am not such a bad guy and my only bad quality is that I didn't try harder to prove I love them. Tha sad part is I am not the only victim, my parents and family are as well. None of us knows where they live, just a mailing address. If they ever see this I hope they get the chance to know me and my family. We use to be there family.

I love you kids.

Date: April 05, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Having been through all of these things with my ex, what seems to have worked for everyone is that he pays (garnished)20% of gross rather than a set amount. His pay always varries. It adds up being less that what would be ordered but the peacefulness of both of us and the kids is well worth the lesser amount of money. We have been through the child support now and then, court ordered, losing his house, quitting his job and not having a relationship with the kids because of anger over child support. Filing and acceptable agreement with the Court and one outside the court that was agreeable is sooooo much better. From my point of view, I needed help to get him to pay fairly but the Court system wanted to go for the throat. Everybody suffered.

Date: April 05, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I have read through most of the responses to Readers Digest and I have to say I am shocked. Granted the system is not perfect but it was introduced because there were so many women and children in a terrrible situation due to no emotional or financial support from fathers. The mother who didn't have a dime, had to get a lawyer and take the issue to court to try and force the payment and because there was no repercussions to non-compliance it was a fruitless effort. Our courts were jammed with the issues of child support and then they introduced Support and Enforcement. What I can't get over is these court orders are agreed upon and signed by both parties so why is it there are so many men that are in this tragic situation? There are always in every system cases where the innocent are affected in a harsh way and I feel for those people. I truely question if there is information that is being left out with some of your writers. I find it very hard to believe that the courts and the system is that ridgid and if it is, then I guess its your turn to have to fight for what is right like we did to get the Support and Enforcement started.

Date: April 05, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I'm old enough now to have witnessed the break-up of couples whose weddings I attended. I've also heard the stories of numerous other men and women, who have experienced divorce and/or separation. Custody and child support are topics they all feel strongly about but men seem to bear a disproportionate share of condemnation from all of them, except the one or two men, who have found themselves victimized by the unfair and biased system described in your article.

The women seem to share textbook negative stereotypes about fathers, yet, in almost none of the cases have they faced any personal difficulties with child support or custody; they simply repeat horror stories they've read or heard reported in the media -- those rare cases in which men who could afford to pay simply refuse to do so. Their anger and opinions are based more on hearsay than on their own experiences.

What's even worse is that at least five of these women I know collect child support and social support for their children. They declare little or no income yet live very comfortable lives -- more comfortable than most of the single mothers I know, who are working every day to support their children. This group of five deadbeat mothers belong to fitness clubs. They drive cars. They go out to restaurants and bars four or five nights a week. They go on vacations down south at least once a year. Although most of them are trained and qualified at some kind of work, they don't officially hold a job. They work part time for cash in local bars or restaurants, or they mind other people's children, or they work as catering staff. When I talk to them about their lives, they candidly answer that they love the way they live. They laugh at people like me for getting caught up in "the rat race" while they, between the child support and the social support, live just as well or better and don't have to work at all, except occasionally for mad money.

There is a bias built into our government agencies and our courts that favours women and targets men. This is a truth that elicits howls of protest from those who benefit in one way or another from the status quo but it's a truth nonetheless.

Date: April 05, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I've been reading this post since the article came out and I certainly feel for all those men. My husband has been going thru the sytem for 12years now and it's not getting any better. The payments are getting higher and all the extras as well and we have two younger children that are being affected now. I hate what our FAIR and EQUAL system is doing to the payors. I recently went to the canada.justice.gc.ca/ website and posted my comments in the justice department forum, not like anyone will read it but it's a start. I want to help change things and i'm not exactly sure where to start, so that was the beginning. Hang in there men and the few women. I only wish someone wake up and look at the injustice within our government and judicial system.

Date: April 05, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I certainly believe that the so-called dead-beat dads are given a serious injustice when it comes to being assessed payment requirements. I am very glad that my late ex-wife and I had a better grasp of how we parents should react to the conditions we were in. We decided that it was in the best interest of our son to be civil with each other. I do understand that sometimes things are not very good between the spouses and that can be troublesome. I also believe that, from first hand knowledge, that depression sets in with the loss of the child or children and that can be very traumatic for the losing spouse. We need to be much more compassionate towards these spouses, regarding child-support, parental visitations, anything that pertains to the child or children of the marriage. I as a person that has gone through a great deal of depression know just how much these people need understanding and support. It my sense that the dead-beat dad just isn't that kind of person in normal circumstances and the judges, the child protection services people, the government who make these laws need to be more understanding of the situation. These strict guidelines are just too rigid for ALL situations and need to be tempered with compassion and understanding.

Date: April 05, 2001
Name:

Comments:
The fact that this issue is the focus of such heated debate saddens me. Divorce is a horrible thing, and the divorce of a couple with children is even worse. I am a recently divorced mother of three children ages 4, 6, and 7. Both my ex and I have well paying jobs, but neither of us make enough to support our family on our own.
Together without anger or resent for the sake of our children, who we love deeply, we have devised a budget so that we are able to make ends
meet for our children's need. I beleive that there are dead beat dads and dead beat moms, any parent whether they are male or female, who is involved in a vendictive custody, or child support battle should be ashamed, if a parent is not able to sacrafice themselves for the well being of their child they are deadbeats!!!! All adults who have children, must act as just that, adults, I believe that many divorcees are less mature than the children they are fighting over, let's grow up!!!!

Date: April 05, 2001
Name:

Comments:
The article was very true in regards to the changes indicated, expect for the missing of the point that in the child support programs the custodial parent is not held accountable or responsible on how the child support payments are spent. My case I have a child support order for which I pay some $ 1500 a month ( which I pay on time) for 3 childern. I have joint custody with twice a week and every other week end access. I have witness various abuses of the money to the point where I have now determined that the child support payments ( which my childern refer to as mommy's pay day) are simply a method of redistribution of my income to my ex-wife with very little being given to my childern ( I am expected to pay for half of the school expenses, hair cuts, medical insurances - half of what is not covered by it, provide them with a home, clothes and food while in my care, etc).

Date: April 04, 2001
Name:

Comments:
I too am considered as a deadbeat dad....nothing could be further from the truth. My ex-wife and I came to a support agreement in the mid 1980s and it worked great for us,then along came the NDP and went after all the bad fathers....which I agree with.Well they came to power in 1990,set up the support nonsense in 1992, I was told I was over $16,000.00 in arrears because they had no record of my in their files,I had to pay up or have my paycheque garnashied,guess what I produced copies of the bank statements, at my expense,to prove them wrong,well they did garnashie my cheque anyway,it took months of legal bills $5000.00 to get them into court to get my money back. It worked,but it was expensive,I guess I used some of the 16 grand they thought I had kept.

Fast forward to 2000, my daughter was turning 20,completed college and i felt I was no longer required to support her,on my lawyers advice I sent the Family Responsiblity office copies of my daughters birth certificate and diploma well in advance of her birthday. I was totally ignored,I contacted my m.p.p. who was not willing to come forward and assist a deadbeat dad.... my lawyer sent letters to the FRO and the bill to me again no luck,I then tried the ombudsmans office,they would do nothing for me. I had bought a new house and the money saved from my daughter was to assist me with my mortgage,got the mortgage,but now I can't repay it as the FRO are still taking money from me for my daughter. This went on for months with no success. I faxed them for an answer and got nothing, I finally had to write to the A.G. himself Mr. D.Young and lo and behold with in a week I was no longer paying for my daughter. now to get the money back that they took will be another huge exercise.

I have no problem with paying for my children,I do have a major problem with what is done with the money that any ex-partner receives. There are no checks and balances to make sure that the money we payors give goes towards the children actually goes to help.

Date: April 04, 2001
Name: John Hancock

Comments:
I definitely think divorced/seperated Fathers get a raw deal and the Government Agencies, such as the Family Maintenance Enforcement Program are relentless and uncaring in their persuit of the money owed. I knew I owed money in arrears and was certainly willing to pay. After being on Social Assistance for many (almost 10) years, due to a chronic back problem I returnrd to work, in March, 2000, against my Doctors wishes, as I felt I had to start to pay back my arrears. As soon as I did, they threatened me (if I did not start a repayment program with them) with a warrant for my arrest and jail, suspension of my drivers license (which I needed to get to & from my Chiropractors appointments and work, using a borrowed car from a friend as I can certainly not afford one of my own) and harassed me, to the point where I suffered a heart attack last July and was off work for 4 1/2 months. While I was off, they then proceeded to take 50% of my Sick Benefits on EI (which was more than the agreed rate of my Maintenence payments) leaving me with only $82 to live on per month. When I returned to work I tried on many occasions to contact them to resume my payments (by telephone, FAX etc.) but to no avail (their line was always busy with NO answering machine to leave a message and I received no answer to my FAX to them). However, since they were not getting any more money from my EI, they then sent me a letter stating that if I did not resume my payments, they would suspend my license..AGAIN a threat! (This is not the whole of my story here as I am trying to keep this as short as possible.)
They have NO mercy or understanding nor will they listen when you try to explain any circumstances - they only tell you, "That is the rules and we can and WILL strictly enforce them!"

Date: April 04, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Everyone is blaming the dads for this mess but it's the government that is to blame. If there so concerned with the children then give the dad a deduction to pay it. The mom can claim the children as a expense but it's the dad who pays.
This government has taxed us to death everything is taxed now. A bank can make a billion dollars profit and pay no taxes but a dad who has to live, get to work, pay child support. Gets no deduction.
People have to realize that to have two homes costs more money than one. I have to travel 100's of miles to see my kids. After all the bills and stuff I don't have no money to do things like that. The government is persecuting well intentioned dads for there tax you to death policy. I get the kids and I still have to pay and the kids aren't even there. There is no accountability how the money is spent. I know
fathers who's money just goes to vacations around the world. I know somebody that got in arrears cause of a layoff and when he got back to work he paid the arrears in a lump payment. The X went to
Mexico for 3 weeks with her new boyfriend while the kid was going to school. The money is not spent on the kids.
It also seems like the people that do not want to pay never pay and the government seems not to be able to collect from these guys anyway. Don't matter what they do. Some guys don't care if they throw them in prison they don't care there not paying and that's it. All the dads are getting blamed for these very few.

If they truly want to solve this problem and do what's in the best interest of the child then make it so it's tax deductible on both sides. What's the problem with that? If a guy can lower his tax bracket a few points because of this there would be more money for his kids.
Like think of this for a second they let you write off a RRSP but you can't write off your kids. It's the kids bill that is by far the biggest bill a guy has to pay and it's paid first.

The government is collecting blood money. Setting it up so it's based on the net when they know they take 1/2 is barbaric then blame the dads when they get behind and pounce on them like animals and rip what's left to shreds. Somebody should copy and mail this whole discussion to every human rights organization in the world. Lets show Canada in it's true colors. Red.
They got the nerve to talk about other countries.

Like this system is better than a tax deduction? It's a billion dollar industry. None of that money is going to the kids. It's going to the government in court costs and wages to enforce there idiotic system.

It's probably even illegal but nobody has the cash to fight it.

It appears were in the dark ages. People are spending life savings in lawyers fees and the kids are getting nothing. Shame on you.

Way to go Canada.

Date: April 04, 2001
Name:

Comments:
Raw deal, shafted, hung out to dry, raped... just some of the more "printable" terms some non-custodial fathers use to describe their situations. Let's not forget though, it's just the non-custodial fathers that suffer; sometimes it's a non-custodial mother that's taken for this ride as well.

Donna Laframboise's article is a great eye-opener though it seems to only focus on the male side of the fence. As well, it does little in order to help or tell us who are stuck or just getting started down this long road of misery where to go to seek proper help or how to avoid it. Nor do I doubt it will in any way affect or change the repugnant downward spiral this government and legal system has so clearly chosen for itself, this issue and the fathers and children involved.

My story is not unlike the others; we have a son, we got separated and a wonderful legal mess ensued. Since then, my son's mother has stopped letting me see our son (on her own accord, I might add) and as if I wasn't heartbroken enough about not being able to see our son, his mother has recently gone and moved clear across the country, adding insult to injury.

I am by no means a "dead-beat dad". I pay my child support on time via pre-authorized payment through my bank account and the Family Responsibility Office. True, I did live in a different city, but managed to come up every month to see my son. I would spend all the time in the world with my son - WHEN I got to see him. We'd get up at the same time, we'd play together and we'd pass out watching TV together. When we are together, we are inseparable. He happily tagged along without question and when he called for me, I gladly returned the favor. I'd give him my right arm, left leg and both kidneys if he ever needed it. Simply put, I love my son, as do most fathers out there, I'm sure.

My support is by no means close to what these other poor souls are paying and it's with great sadness I wait for the system to come back and finish me off. I'm a wounded animal to a pack of uncaring and starving jackals. Despite this and the fact that I've recently moved back to my hometown (to be able to see him more often, and to find out she'd moved further away within the same month) and have had to quit my job to do so, I still pay my support on time (I seriously fear having to change any of those arrangements). Yet no one is in a big hurry to help me have access to my son (but watch how fast they jump if I neglect on a payment!!).

Still, here I sit, facing another of many long legal battles to "fix" things so our son can see his dad. His mother never seemed to want to make it easy for us. I say "us" because it's not only my rights she's trampling on, but our son's too. It's an uphill battle where "for the better of the child" is just another phrase for "we don't care about you or your feelings or what the kid thinks, just cough up the money and have a nice day." Equally depressing is when I tell anyone who cares to listen that I WANT to see my son and watch him grow, they just sit there and look at me like I've just sprouted a third eye.

Oh, it's a great country we live in, but fear the day you have kids and a family life that falls apart and you don't have the breasts - you're going to hell in a hand basket, first class. Our systems are certainly NOT on your side.

It’s time to stop the labeling, discriminating and obscene playing of god. There are as many deadbeat mothers as there are deadbeat dads out there and it's time the governments, law makers, judges, lawyers and citizens to stop the peeing contest and think of what's really at stake here... our future generations. It’s time to change the old system before it claims more “desperate dads” and make it work for the TRUE “good of our children”… oh, and have a nice day.

Date: April 04, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
I am married to a man who pays child support. We have two children together.
Due to the rate of child support based on all income, including over-time, we pay about $150 per month more then my husband would be paying if he didn't work over-time. However, because the court order is based on yearly income with over-time my husband now has to work over-time so we can barely make ends meet.
When he was locked out of work he contacted Family Responsiblity and was informed he still had to pay or go to court to change the order. Without an income how were we to pay for a lawyer to change the court order????
My husband has been made out to be a "deadbeat Dad" by his ex to his daughter even though he has made every child support payment for the past 13 years.
The Government in it's infinite wisdom has made it almost impossible for fathers to financially support their children and to financially support themselves.

Date: April 04, 2001
Name:

Comments:
-I have 2 children who are living with my X wife.
-I have been paying support for over 10 years.
-I share a basement suite with a college student.
-I am a professional working full time.
-I have little in terms of nest eggs or retirement funds.

BUT, I CONSIDER MYSELF TO BE VERY LUCKY when I compare myself to others, who are forced to make child support payments that are beyond their means.

I think that the question to ask is not "Do divorced fathers often get a raw deal?" but "WHY ARE THERE SO MANY DIVORCED FATHERS?", or "WHO REALLY GAINS FROM A DIVORCE?", or "WHO, IN OUR SOCIETY, IS PROMOTING DIVORCE?" These are questions that will get to the heart of the problem. If they can be answered, and the real villains (not the fathers) can be dealt with according to their crimes, then a huge part of the "child poverty problem" will be solved.

Date: April 04, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
Excellent article. The system does need change.
But what about the flip side?
I know of a woman who put her husband through school and when he got established in his job left her for another woman. Took the kids (by turning them against her) and is always after her for more money even though he makes twice as much as she does. The kids aren't even young anymore one is
18 and the other is 22, only the youngest is sort of in school.
I think that marriage should be made much harder to get into and that common-law living should be considered very carefully, then maybe we wouldn't have so many divorces.
As it is marriage has no meaning now a days and if a child finishes elementry school with both his/her natural parents they're extremely lucky and not the present norm.

After reading some of the responses you have received maybe Readers Digest should consider sending copies of them all to the appropreate
Agentcies. It will most likely be a waste of time
but it's an idea.

Date: April 04, 2001
Name: JO

Comments:
Thank you for "BRAVELY" printing that article.

There is no equality in our current system. It is unforunate that some mothers get a raw deal but the fact is for "US" honest hard workers fathers there is no fairness!

The laws must change. When A woman chooses to make you a ex-husband it should not make you a ex-father. In the age of equality why can we not take shared responsability for the emotinal and financial needs of our children.
The majority of fathers do not mind paying, we just feel that the amounts could be more fair and that we should not have to fight for our right to raise our children.

I HAVE to pay my ex to take care of our kids 100% of the month yet they spend nearly half the month with me. Why do I have to pay twice?

When you are together you live through financial hardships and make do, you live within your means. When you seperate suddenly if you are laid off or hurt and can not work, you become a deadbeat when you fall behind. This is wrong!

Child support is necessary, it should not be about a free ride!

Date: April 04, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
As a divorced father of two grown sons, I have first-hand experience at what the Canadian legal system can do to a man. I have been petitioned for more money virtually every 18 months for the past nine years by an ex-wife who uses the legal aid system for free. The courts are not humane when it comes to the treatment of men.
I care about my children and have done a lot more than "my legal share" when it comes to contributing to their well-being but it goes unnoticed by a politically correct legal system which seems bent on only satisfying the vocal left wing minority or the women't rights movement.
Bill C-41 was quite simply a tax grab by the Liberal government which pacified the women's movement by did severe damage to men and, by extension, to children of divorce. Men whose support arrangements were changed because of this law now have less money for themselves but also less to give their children.
Any man who voted for the Liberals after the passing of this Bill should be ashamed of themselves. They are legally stealing from us. How much more is it going to take for the men of this country to stand up and be counted. We are no better than women and we are perhaps all not the best fathers either but the vast majority care deeply for their children and contribute (financially) as best they can to the children's upbringing.
When a couple with kids is together they are both "expected" to contribute financially to the upkeep of the household, etc. Why is it that after a divorce, only the man is supposed to pay?

Date: April 04, 2001
Name: Name withheld

Comments:
My ex disappeared when I was 2 1/2 months pregnant. He did not break up with me, he just stood me up for a date and stopped calling. He knew I was pregnant.

So I called him when our baby was 4 months old and when he heard my voice he hung up. I called back and left a message telling him that I needed child support. He never returned my call. I took it to court and he dragged it out for 6 months, instructing his lawyers to only respond to my lawyers' offers the day before court, ordering DNA tests, switching lawyers, etc, etc...

As it turned out, he had alot more money than anyone ever knew. When all his financial papers were revealed in court, it was incredible how much money he had. And here I am using cloth diapers and using milk cupons provided by the health unit for unprivilaged families!

Finally when she was 13 months old he payed his first amount as court ordered. But he did pay several days late...

This article had an emotional impact on me. I am sure there are caring dad's, but what of those who never see their children and only pay when they have to accorinding to the courts? Those men who marry because it is 'the thing to do' and don't really want the responsibility of kids?

Date: April 04, 2001
Name:

Comments:

I was being to pay $500 per month for an 8 year old child. That was a tremendous amount, considering my income. My son was not supported with food and clothing, and always came for visits dressed in rags and hungry. It was a nasty businees, with pay checks and