cart
details
ISBN-10: 1-55022-870-6
ISBN-13: 978-1-55022-870-0
6 x 9 in, 240pp, paperback
$19.95 CAD
March 2009
- Thursday, March 25, 2010 - 4:39pm
- Saturday, March 27, 2010 - 1:00pm
- Wednesday, March 31, 2010 - 7:30pm
- Wednesday, March 31, 2010 - 7:30pm
- Tuesday, April 13, 2010 - 6:00pm
- Wednesday, April 14, 2010 - 7:30pm
- Tuesday, April 20, 2010 - 7:30pm
- Thursday, April 29, 2010 - 7:30pm
Tug of War
by Harvey Brownstone
my ex took me to court in 01
my ex took me to court in 01 he was ordered to pay $100 a month because he apparently didnt have an income which is a lie he was working in the states under the table and he was awarded every other weekend and wed evenings right from the get go he messed up wasnt paying support not once did he have her on a wed and half the time didnt bother with his weekends she was 3 then shes almost 12 now i moved 5 hours away so i didnt havent to see my daughters heart get broken regularly hes a hard core drinker and drug abuser and when he has her he bashes me to her, he has called cas on me a few times which i thanked him for now if he decides to take me to court i can bring their info with me, the court system the law and cas do not intertwine legally ive looked into it.
this guy is brilliant!
Just heard Justice Brownstone interviewed on the radio today. This guy is brilliant. He talks more sense, and with more heart, than anyone I've ever met in the legal profession (and I've met quite a few). I ran out and bought his book and now can't put it down. Kudos to you, Judge Brownstone, for telling it like it is. I don't know if the immature, self-absorbed parents who fight with each other endlessly at their children's expense will be able to really understand and apply the advice you've given, but I applaud you for speaking out. Tug of War is one of the best books I've ever read, and should be required reading for every parent, separated or not.
Steven
Lets face it Divorce like welfare is Big ,money Racket for the lawyers states and counties (parishes). there are no stopping them . For one they have the power to abuse and do so, so often that the only person who benefits from this power is the Big Divorce Machine.
I being the recipient of false accusation of spousal abuse and child abuse have received their Wrath. Regardless of overwhelming evidence I collected proving that my ex methodically , with malice, and purpose did alienate my son and daughter from me . The good result is my son is now 20 , my daughter is 17 and with the support of the court through false restraining orders has effectively severed any ties I could have ever had with my son and daughter. That's reprehensible and felonious.
The last time I spoke with my Kids was April 28,1998 . Now i am looking to see who i can sue. For aiding with my Exs ability to effectively stop and change my civil rights, with false allegations, and no evidence to support it. How does one abuse some one with no contact with them???? Whats so ever!!! Just because she is afraid means that i have my liberties removed.
When you are accused or allegations that abuse is being done you are not only to stay away from her or him but you cannot purchase a fire arm , your rights to your children cease....you can be jailed for not continuing support and your support increases because you dont have any contact with "your" children. Tell me she didn't plan and talk this all out with her divorced friends , her mother as well as her lawyer. The last hearing i had her lawyer got up and told the judge that i hadn't paid any child support to her . But i wasn't allowed to show evidence that support was being taken out of my paycheck to pay the state back for what they paid her as child support ! another lie another infraction as far as the courts were concerned. That day I lost my parental rights to my children
There is no consequences to the other party for lying to the courts about you ... But if you miss one support payment you are held in contempt of court, or they take your licenses, driver, professional, thus you can't work anyway because they just took your ability to make money away. And if you have a home look out you will more than likely loose that to ..... especially if the other has filed for welfare .... and it does not matter if you know that the other is able to work or not .
Put it this way if you didn't kidnap the children and you do not file for divorce first ... you might as well hang your life up!!! as well as any visitation you might expect to receive. I am grateful for PAAS taking up this issue but for me its about 12 years too late now i am seeking to recoup damages emotional and monetary or what ever i can get. Because what my Ex did is the equivalent of Kidnapping and Legal extortion with the help and blessings of the family court system in California.
Men don't marry anyone from California and then try to divorce them . because they are trained up in the ways and wiles of the corrupt judicial system also known as Family Court
Dan
If you think California is bad, welcome to Ontario, Canada. I went through very similar circumstances with very similar results. I was falsely accused of spousal abuse by my ex, was jailed, and put on a restraining order. There was no proof of the alleged abuse, nor was there any reason to believe her allegations, other than her word. I finally got a court order to see my son, but she was awarded interim custody. The courts in canada NEVER change custody from interim if more than a year has passed. This was obviously the plan from day one. I later found out it was her lawyer who walked her through the whole 911 process. These simple lies by her were her winning ticket to the lottery. She got a free lawyer because she didn't work. I had to pay for mine. Her lawyer dragged the case out for 2 years, knowing that the court would NEVER change the custody arrangement after that long. She got half of my house (I bought and paid for it prior to us getting married), she got half of my RRSPs (retirement money in canada), and she now gets half of my pay cheque for the next 10 years. She also was awarded retro-active spousal support (alimony) for the two years we were in court, so I also owe her over $21,000.00 in arrears with interest.
I do see my son now though, however, I have no money to spend on him. His mother does absolutely nothing with him. He lives in his room, even eats in his room. Yet there is nothing or nobody available to help him (or me). So she sits home each day drinking and doing her drugs, collecting my money. My life ending experience began when I decided to give my ex an ultimatum. I could no longer live with her alcohol and substance abuse problems, so I told her that I was putting my foot down that she needed to get help for her problem. I vowed to help her in every way I possibly could. But if she didn't get help, then I would be leavig her and taking our son with me. While she was considering my ultimatim, she went to see some lawyers. Next thing I know she decided to call 911. And there was a biased, unfair, injust system just waiting for me. When Court heard my charges and I was found NOT GUILTY, I tried to sue her for false allegations, but was told that I would not get anywhere because "the woman's groups were so powerfull that they would not allow any judge to find her guilty because that would discourage other woman from coming forward with there abusive relationships". Now, I get to "visit" my son, I will never have any money to do things with him. I will never own a house again. I can't even start over until I'm about 56 years old. Welcome to Canada... home of the Family Flaw System.
John Murray
His honour is right on about the harm and damage caused to children in Ontario Family Court = However he does not deal with one of the most relevant issues that underlay the argument and it is the unfair Federal child support lawso many good dads have been forced into bankruptcy and a hell of financial pain because of laws that were put in place not to benefit custodial parents and their children but based on what is the best tax collection situation for the Federal government - Non Custodial parents, usually the father, losses all financial control of his own life - changes to court orders have to go through court - so if you set a payment of 1000 dollars a month and your income drops, you lose 50% net I have lived three years or more where I take home only 36% of every dollar I make = My son lived with me for six moths and I still had to pay the same amount and she collected the Child tax benefit =I appealed it and lost
Divorce seems to be a big
Divorce seems to be a big business, and the financial risks high for getting married in Canada. More people probably are questioning whether getting into relationships is worth it. Staying single, might be the best thing. I think I will check out the book Tug of War after I saw it mentioned on the show this evening.
Steve
You cannot defend against the kind of insanity which is the family court. Most of us have not seen our child in years. The courts trivialize fathers so the only choice is to move on and just live your life. Remember, know the things you can control and change and accept what you cannot change or control. Just move on and hope that the child can break the emotional kidnap and obtain the wisdom to know how much their father loves them
I find this statement being
I find this statement being used “non-custodial parent” simply undermines the truth here because 90% of the time, fathers are the non-custodial parents and are the ones paying support and not receiving proper access to their children. Plus, to make thing really difficult for the father, all the mother has to do is cry child abuse and the father is out of the picture. From then on, he is required to have supervised visits and automatically loses weekends with the child until the charge is dismissed.
I would like to see severe penalties in place for these kinds of false accusations. Maybe the one making these false claims should have to give custody to the other parent if they are in a position to care for the child.
catherine bain
I was told this week by a CAS worker (16 years) that week about is a good idea, BUT it does NOT work. In this case the father is NON communicative, He is an expert at making the child feel guilty. Does not let his daughter have friends over to visit. If the mother calls the calls are recorded which is o.k. but strange. He and his par amour speak badly against the mother and are trying very hard to elianate the child from her mother. We live in a small town and the CAS person working on the case has known the father for years. The mother is from Toronto and I was wondering if there is not a ruling that prohibits the CAS worker working on this case. Every time we went to court it was a different judge with a different outlook on the case. At one point the Par Amour who happens to be my husbands niece was ordered to have no connection to the child. The next judge over ruled it. The child is 11.
parental alienation
I just read Justice Brownstone's article in the Globe and Mail (Saturday April 25 edition), on the topic of parental alienation. That article should put to rest any concerns people may have about his views in this area. He is the first and only judge (that I've ever heard of) to engage the public in this way, and he has clearly expressed his disdain for parents who turn their children against other parents. He sets out the various options that courts have to address this problem (and those options are admittedly weak and insufficient), but at least he has once again proven that he's not afraid to speak out and communicate with the public on this important issue. Regardless of whether you agree with the law, or with the way in which the justice system works, you have to give this guy his chops - he's fearless, and not afraid to put himself "out there" so that a public debate on this crucial issue can occur. Kudos to Justice Brownstone for once again setting a great example for other judges to hopefully follow.
Let's get real
What about mothers' rights?
I mean, if the kids have to live with their father, shouldn't I at least have 50-50 rights over them?
=================
If children have to live with there mother, shouldn't The father have the right to 50-50 rights?? You can wish me luck too.
50-50 shared parenting has to make sense for your life!
Although it is undeniable that a 50-50 shared parenting arrangement is the ideal parenting plan, it has to be workable and practical. The parents should live near each other so that the child can go to school easily from each parent's home. The parents should have similar routines so that the child doesn't have to contend with two completely opposite parenting styles (bedtimes, chores, rules about TV watching, computer use, and of course, curfews!). The parents' work schedules and the child's extra-curricular activities have to be considered too. Children need stability, consistency and most of all, PEACE. If parents are constantly bickering about who should be taking the child to the doctor, or dentist, or to the barber, or who should be responsible for getting the child to hockey, then it's not going to work. Many, many parents agree amicably to 50-50 shared parenting and it works beautifully. BUT unfortunately, most of the parents who litigate parenting disputes in family court are NOT candidates for shared parenting arrangements, because they are too preoccupied with issues of power and control than with compromising and being reasonable with each other. Courts don't generally see peace-making parents; they see parents who engage in wars. It's amazing how many parents blame the court system when they should be blaming themselves for their failure to put the emotional baggage of the relationship behind them and deal with each other in a civilized, mature way. Sometimes it's only ONE parent who is being unreasonable and immature - and that makes it very stressful and difficult and frustrating for the other parent, who's trying to be fair and reasonable. But the court can't change people's personalities - it is very rare that litigation would make a person change his/her attitudes and behaviours (don't believe me? read some of the posts on this blog!!) Justice Brownstone has written an important and valuable book that tries to give parents an honest, frank picture of what really goes on in family court, and it's obvious that he agrees with all of you who've said that the justice system is a terrible option for resolving parenting conflicts. I have worked in the family court system a long time and I can tell you that his book is accurate and fair, and his advice should be taken seriously. And if you want 50-50 shared parenting, be prepared to show the judge how it is actually going to work in day to day life. Children are not pieces of meat or property that can simply be cut in half; they're human beings. Remember, being a good parent is about the quality of the time you spend with your child, not quantity.
Mike Murphy
The lawyers and judges have created an adversarial dysfunctional arena for parents to do battle. 50-50 equal parenting should be the presumption. If a parent can't cooperate the answer is simple and swift. Custody goes to to the cooperating parent. I think we will then see far more cooperation. I disagree totally and emphatically with your premise about high conflict cases not good candidates. As just stated if the courts start making emphatic decisions instead of encouraging adversary, parents will quickly learn to grow up or they will lose custody - premised they are starting from a point of equality.
Your analysis of the science of human behaviour based on these blog posts is not credible. The environment has to be level, equal and not as broken as it is now. Brownstone has started a dialogue but it must go on. Perhaps he is trying his best to change things and that is good, but much more has to occur federally and provincially and within the legal realm. He can't blame it all on parents. Perhaps some of his decisions will rub off on other lazy judges who see the status quo as the easiest one to navigate.
If children are not property why do judges award ownership to mothers in a 9-1 ratio and marginalize fathers to non-parent visitors? ? The courts treat children as chattels now. You are on the inside and can't see that! They are clearly not. That is one of its major systemic failures. You may work in the court system but that can ensure your perspective is somewhat incestuous and not broad enough to see the big picture.
Courts are adversarial by nature
You are reinforcing exactly what Justice Brownstone is saying in Tug of War: the court system is an adversarial system that by its very nature encourages parents to fight and make war, not peace. That's why the author suggests NOT using the court system to resolve parenting disputes. That's the whole point of his book. Can't you see that?
And you say that custody should be granted to the "more cooperative parent". Sorry to tell you this, but in most custody cases, NEITHER parent is cooperative. They're both so wrapped up in their personal agendas of vengeance and retribution, that the dispute is not really about the children at all: the dispute is about power and control. Judges have to sift through the incomplete and mostly irrelevant evidence that parents give them, and try to make the best possible decision. It's an impossible task because the necessary evidence about which (if any) parent is most capable of meeting the child's needs, simply never gets before the judge.
Yes I totally agree that 50-50 shared parenting should be the default position and is the ideal plan, but all you have to do is go to family court and watch the proceedings to see that it simply is not feasible in 99% of the cases. And by the way, mothers usually get custody because very few fathers ask (oh sure, they ask for joint custody, but statistically very few fathers ask for primary residence).
Justice Brownstone's book is right on. It has struck a chord with the public and attained best seller status because it resonates with millions of people who have endured unspeakable pain in the family court system - both mothers and fathers, and yes, the children. Parents need counselling to get over the anger and pain of their relationship breakup, so they can treat each other as equals and put their emotional baggage behind them. This applies to mothers and fathers. But the court system is not a place where this can happen. It should be avoided at all costs. For a judge to have the guts to stand up and speak out, is monumental. It was a gutsy, courageous thing to do. One judge can't change the system, but at least he got the dialogue started by exposing the truth about the family court system: it's bad for children, and litigation between parents is bad for the parents too. There's got to be a better way for 2 parents who hate each other to put their children's needs first by sharing the custody 50-50, rather than engage in bitter tugs of war where the children lose out on having 2 parents meaningfully in their lives.
I am a father who succeeded in getting 50-50 shared custody NOT because we went to court, but because my ex-wife and I spent our money on family counselling instead of legal fees. It was hard work, and certainly not easy. But the $20 we spent on Tug of War made all the difference in our lives, and in the lives of our son and daughter. The book made sense to us, so we dropped our court case, fired our lawyers (except to handle the financial issues), and hired a parenting coordinator to develop a parenting plan for us. Thank you Justice Brownstone for writing Tug of War. I think Tug of War should be required reading for every parent, separated or not.
Mike Murphy
You did the right thing and I am very happy it worked out for you.
It does take two to arrive at your destination and if I had an ex who was willing to cooperate out of court we could have resolved it 4 years ago. It still is before the courts. Unfortunately many of the judges I have had to deal with have had their sensitivity training , are lazy and status quo oriented. Dad's don't stand a chance.
I also agree Justice Brownstone has opened a dialogue but I don't agree with his premise that parents are to blame. Their are systemic problems and a new paradign is needed. Dr. Jayne Major recently presented a paper at the Parental; Alienation Syndrome Symposium in Toronto at the end of March that speaks to it.
Best of luck. You and your ex deserve it because you've put yur children first.
you're wrong
Judges are not status quo oriented or mom oriented. They are child-focussed.
Whoever feels the judge didn't buy their side of the story will blame the judge. If you'd won your case, you would have praised the judge to the high heavens, and your ex would have said the judge was a mother-hating pig. That's what litigation does to people. That's why Tug of War is right on the mark.
Judge Brownstone is absolutely correct: parents are to blame if they choose to bring a human being into the world and then can't get along well enough to make major decisions together for the child. Yes it takes 2 people to be able to get along, but that's a decision you have to make when you decide to have unprotected sex with someone that could lead to a pregnancy. Next time you have a child, pick someone you like better. But for this child, you're stuck with the other parent and if she won't deal with you, then don't blame the courts for that. Blame your own poor choice in choosing your child's mother.
If you've been litigating for 4 years and getting nowhere, think of the impact on your child of being caught in a tug of war. If the only way to have peace for the child is to stop the fight, then YOU be the mature one and stop it, even if you feel victimized. Your child, who is innocent in all of this, may be suffering too much from the fight, and that should outweigh any benefit you think your child would gain by having more of you in his life. You can't blame the system for the fact that some people (many of whom have personality disorders) will simply NOT deal rationally and reasonably with their exes (which may well be the situation you are facing). You can shift the paradigm all you want but if your ex is hell bent on fighting you every step of the way, NO system will fix that.
It's time for you to take stock of your situation and decide if you're getting anywhere in this battle. You may not like the justice system we've got (who does?), but it is the only system we have, and Tug of War is the most honest book to date to help parents understand (and hopefully avoid) it. Maybe you should get a copy of Tug of War for your ex? Good luck to you, fella!
Mike Murphy
My god you are one naive and gullible person. You're inexperience and naivete shine brightly. You believe Brownstone's propaganda that only children have rights. So you are prepared to let the government walk all over you and in the bargain walk away from your children. That is not love that is cowardice and desertion of innocent children in the extreme. I pity your children that you would take the advice of a $260,000.00 year government employee to give up. You take this fellows advice but I'll fight until my dying breath to be back in my children's lives as an equal loving parent.
Get a life. Love of your children will compel most parents to use every ounce of energy they have to ensure they can stay in their lives. You have been thoroughly brainwashed by a well paid member of the judiciary without a doubt.
Its the judiciary, not parents, refereeing the litigious adversarial system with their colleagues the lawyers profiting from family destruction. When they give physical custody to females in a 9-1 ratio it is nothing short of gender apartheid. The system has to be changed where men are treated as equals.
When I have an equal playing field then Brownstone can start to lecture dads. Until then we will fight for our children. Brownstone and his peers can change that tomorrow without legislation if they had the "family jewels". They don't and haven't for two generations and so we must wait for lawmakers.
Ode to the Judge
Congratulations Judge Brownstone for encouraging parents down the path of negotiation and conciliation, BEFORE going to court.
Putting children first is all-too-often lost in bitter parental disputes. Another great resource - and one that is rare, as it includes information for children involved in a family break up - is www.FamiliesChange.ca.
Thanks for telling it like it is!!
A voice of reason
The problem here, folks, is that when people first step in to Family Court they leave their sanity at the door. Anger, hurt, histrionics, emotional diatribes make a powerful potion that incites irrational behaviour. Sadly, this is exacerbated by the frustration of muddling through complex court procedures. So, as difficult as it may be, put that ranting and raving aside and before going to court, do your homework. Being unable to afford a lawyer is no excuse for walking into court not having a clue what to expect. Go on line and find out. Visit a Family Court and grab all the printed guidelines it offers. Like that court clerk said in an earlier submission to this blog, get some free advice the lawyers Family Court has on hand to help. Also, when assigned a judge, dig for information on him or her: Google the name, check out his/her decisions. I'm also suggesting that you read Tug of War. It's an easy read and offers lots of insight. In the end, when it comes to Family Court, ignorance is not bliss. So, trust me when I say that once you've learned how to maneuver the system emotions may still prevail but they'll be tempered by the confidence of knowing what comes next.
Mike Murphy
Well said. It is very difficult because losing your children is the most personal and difficult thing any parent will face. Getting back in their lives as a parent is worth all it takes. Don't give up on it.
jeff novascone
I agree Mike I have been in a custody battle for four years have not seen my three boys in the four years contempt charges mean nothing I have tried to work things out with the mother out of court and no way she doesn't think of the rights of me or my children and either does the justice system. While I have been fighting to just be in my boys es lives one 16 has now went Nebraska with friends to pick up a car not knowing anything else a boy killed his father and now my son is facing com piracy charges and first degree murder charges omg life is not what is was brought out to be get married have kids to pay child support to children I raised she stole and now I am finally talking to one of my children for all the good it'll do him hes in jail and I pay all my money to child support how can i help this child now? I can't fight for custody with no money. I will never give up on my children like she has.
Confused
What happened to the comments posted by women who lost custody of their children in Brownstone's court? (One of them nicknamed him Harvey Brimstone.) I went to show a friend and couldn't find them. What's up with that?
Cindy
We are out here, there are lots of us, but we cannot afford to fight, most women make less money than men in our society. Yes, it is true, there are many statistics if you look for them. I have not seen my son in 2 years, my ex is getting my child to believe things that didn't happen. I only know of some because of some of the things my child has said to me. My son calls me f'ing bitc _, f 'ing Cun_, makes German jokes about me, says stuff like "what's wrong with your f'ing German mind,", etc. These are the things the dad said to me when we lived together. My son saw his dad and the abuse and suffered himself, but is being convinced that never happened and I am the "bad" person. Yes, people tell me these children will figure it out eventually...but all the poison is already in their minds.
My ex wants revenge for whatever he believes I did (he is the alcoholic, druggee abuser) and he is using the kids to hurt me. He doesn't love the kids.
Mike Murphy
It may have been the language they used. It was "unMotherly" to say the least. I had hoped they would get back to me on my question about equal shared parenting but no luck. I have them on my blog though. Go here. http://parentalalienationcanada.blogspot.com/2009/03/more-on-tug-of-war-...
I'm the one who asked why
I'm the one who asked why comments were removed from this page and thanks to Mike Murphy's reply, my friend and I found them on his blog. Although the language was really offensive, we understand that it was kind of necessary in expressing the utter shock and dismay these women are experiencing. My friend also feels she was railroaded by Judge Brownstone who gave custody to her ex-husband. But, in all fairness, I know the details of the case and under the circumstances at the time, I think his main concern was the well-being of the children. And, I think my friend grudgingly agrees since she has recently admitted to problems that need to be rectified. So, ironically, Judge Brownstone's ruling has forced my friend to face her demons. She's now determined to change her situation so that when she tries to regain custody, she'll be in a much better position to do so. This experience has taught me that as a married mother I'd better buy Tug of War... because you never know. I'm going to lend it to my friend who I'm also encouraging to save enough money to get advice from a good lawyer. That way, when she appears again before Harvey Brownstone or another judge, she'll be armed with an awareness she didn't have during her past court experience.
One of the ladies
I apologize for the 'unmotherly' language, but I'm so angry! Your idea is reasonable but who decides if parents are fit? Obviously, in my case, Judge Brownstone made the decision and I lost my kids. I might have some problems, but I'm a good mother and should have gotten shared custody at least. It's so unfair.
Another one
I'm another mom who used inappropriate language in my comment about Brownstone and sorry for that. I'm so frustrated that he had the nerve to give my ex custody of my children and swearing seemed the only way to let it out. Anyway, I got the short end of the stick by Brownstone but what about that poor woman he put in jail? Get real people: That judge does NOT favour women.
Mike Murphy
Custody ought not to be "Winner take all". Children do better with both mom and dad in their lives as equally as is possible. We need to get over our hurt and deal with sharing. Do get legal advice and when ready discuss sharing custody equally. Anger is normal. We all have it because of our circumstances. The trick is to channel it in some manner and clear away the fog that it and our frustration pulls over our thinking process. I write about it and that helps considerably.
Good luck.
ECW Press
We're glad that Tug of War by Mr. Justice Harvey Brownstone has sparked such debate and are happy to hear various sides of this issue. Please note that these comments are being moderated and we will remove any posts including inappropriate or offensive language.
My experience with Brownstone
I have been involved in a tough custody dispute with my ex for 3 years. I have been a good and responsible father and have been targetted by my ex, who has accused me of everything from abuse to neglect and even to being a "deadbeat" even though I have always paid my child support. My case was set to go to trial next month, but at the last moment my lawyer and my ex's lawyer asked to have the case transferred to Justice Brownstone for a settlement conference. He worked a miracle. He spent 1 1/2 hours with us and talked my ex-wife into joint custody with a 50-50 time split for the children. He was the first judge who really listened to us and somehow saw through all the mud that was being flung - he kept us focussed on the children and even admonished the lawyers for fuelling the dispute instead of working towards a fair settlement. This man walks on water as far as I am concerned. After we signed the joint custody agreement, both lawyers told my ex-wife and myself that Justice Brownstone saved us each at least $15,000 in legal fees, because we no longer needed a trial. Take it from a father who had the experience of seeing Justice Brownstone in action after being tortured by 2 other judges for 3 years. He is a great and wise man who really understands human nature and gets people to do the right thing. I'm going to buy a copy of his book but I have a feeling I already know what's in it. I hope the judge never reads this blog because he doesn't deserve to see the hurtful and unfair comments made about him. He really is a good and helpful judge.
Glenn
This is hopeful to hear! Too bad I'm stuck at Jarvis Street were insanity is the order of the day!
Where the placement of a Christmas tree take presidence over a "child's best interest" or at least gets more publicity!
I tried to look on Canlii for some of Brownstone's judgement and there doesn't seem to be any of these from him.
Can someone direct me to where these cases/judgements are published?
judges rarely deliver written decisions
The overwhelming majority of judicial decisions are delivered orally (as opposed to in written decisions), so they're not available on CanLII or QuickLaw.
Glenn
Maybe all judgements should be published in order to see exactly what is transpiring in the family courts and that way any deserving attention is paid to a paticular judge?
Maybe Judge Brownstone could abvocate for better transperancy in family court and have all orders published by all judges?
What about mothers' rights?
What about mothers' rights? Let me tell how what Jutice Brownstone did to me. When I made a decision last year to keep my abusive and philandering husband away from my children because he hid assets and paid far too little child support (while happily supporting a new wife and her two kids from her prior marriage), Justice Brownstone first sent me to jail for 30 days. He then increased my ex-husband's access to the children and when I still refused to let him see them, he gave me an empty warning which I was advised by lawyers to ignore because I was assured that judges always favour mothers. Three months ago Justice Brownstone took my children away from me and gave them to their father. Now I only see them on alternate weekends. My life is ruined. Last week I got a copy of Justice Brownstone's book out of curiosity. I will admit that I learned a lot from it, but it's too late for me. If I had read it before the first contempt motion that my ex-husband brought, I might have reacted differently to the threats the judge was making. So any mother out there who thinks this guy is just blowing bubbles with empty threats, think again. This judge is a fathers' rights dream come true. By the way, I have now brought a motion for joint custody - I mean, if the kids have to live with their father, shouldn't I at least have 50-50 rights over them? Wish me luck. This judge is tough on parents if he thinks they're more interested in getting revenge against each other than doing what's right for the children.
Child support has NOTHING to
Child support has NOTHING to do with a parent's right to see their child. Your issue should be with your lawyer you gave you BAD advice, not Justice Brownstone for doing the right thing. You being angry at your ex for hiding money and cheating on you does NOT give you the right to withhold your children from him.
As a mother it TORE my heart out to send my daugther to her father's as I knew the day would come when his abuse would spill from his current wife to my child. But I followed my court orders to the letter of the law. The law is the law PERIOD. Why anyone would tell you to ignore a court order is beyond me.
you got what you deserved
Lady, from what you've written, it sounds like you got what you deserved. Too many dads have been victimized by the justice system, and bravo to Justice Brownstone for doing the right thing. In fact, just because of what you said he did, I'm going to buy a copy of his book. This judge rocks!
Practicing in Alberta
Harvey Brownstone notes the problems Inherent in family law, but he then attributes them to defects in the people undergoing family breakdown. The Judge sees no causative role for the system of family law that produces the same conflict with divorcing and separating parents year in and year out. What he says is this: "If only these people wouldn't be so upset, my job would be so much more pleasant. Why can't they just learn to sit at the back of the bus?"
phil jones
There is no question that the family court system is largely fractured or at least, cramped up. There are various reasons for this; the main one being the current structure of the family, ie. the paucity of children and the absence of relatives and friends and associates of relatives who in the Latin countries and others, by their size and reach, tend to buffer parental difficulties. The side-note, and a serious one, is the difficulty in not seeing one's children as objects of ownership. This is what we see in the family courts - the frantic and obsessive need to hold on to an object that is inherently one's own and no one elses. It is the duty of the court to ameliorate the pain of a distressed parent or child yet often in so doing the judge will without wanting to inflict enormous pain on another. But the judge is asked to do the impossible. Whatever ameliorating needs to be done has to be done in the family where things are not cut and dried and where all know that there are two sides to the story. A further difficulty is the real and disturbing political conflict between men and women as though they were opposing teams. I know in my own research, I found it odd that women in particular will generally excuse almost any kind of behaviour in other women when it comes to male/female conflicts with children involved. My own feeling is that there are deep cultural forces at work that for whatever reason are mitigating against the need for children with the outcome unknown.
Get real!
No one invites people to go to Family Court. If parents don't want judges to make the decisions, then they should get the help they need to make decisions about their children together. Tug of War is the best book I've ever read, and every parent, separated or not, should read it.
Pat O'Reilly
The almighty dollar is the real problem. Family court is a for-profit operation where lawyers encourage and promote and adversary environment. The longer it goes the more it pays. Judges are bias and very slow to act. I am a father who was forced into family court and I did represent myself. I did my very best to avoid conflict and evidence supports that. I was granted six seperate court orders for access and each one was disobeyed by the mother of our son and daughter. She ran with the children the day after being ordered not to by BC Supreme Court. It's called abduction for men. There were three seperate court ordered reports by social workers, child psychologists and child advocates and all three reported the children were being poisoned against their father and their entire paternal family. The third report states that my daughter is now suffering from "False Memory." This is now the fourth year into a decade long miscarriage or family justice and definitely not in the best interests of the children. I spent years trying to secure "FAIR ACCESS" to my children and I did represent myself while legal aid supplied her with several different lawyers as she broke each court order. She was never punished or even reprimanded for complete contempt of the court. In 2003 the court ordered a full trial with witnesses called to the stand instead of affidavits. Again she was represented by a very senior lawyer and I represented myself. I won full sole custody of my then 9 year old son but not my daughter because, as Justice Barrow stated, she was too successful in destroying the image my daughter had for her father. She didn't stop there and it is now 2009 and I haven't seen or spoke to my son in a year and a half. I still have sole custody but there is not one person or agency willing to or able to enforce my court order. It is a fact that a RCMP detachment commander that has advised the mother to put blocks on her phone and not reveal to me the address where the children were taken too. I filed a complaint with the RCMP complaints dept. but the resulted in me being told to go back to court. This whole fiasco was permitted by the courts and family justice system. They provided the tools and all the support she, her boyfriend and their families needed to destroy the very close and loving relationships that my children and I enjoyed. To this very day, my children have never met their paternal family and in fact have been poisoned against them. The evidence was years old when I was awarded custody of my son and the court chose to ignore the evidence and continue to show favortism and continued to give the mother all the time and ability to brainwash our children. During my closing arguments I referred to the "United Nations Childrens Bill of Rights." I proved that my children were being denied these rights. Court Orders are not worth the paper their printed on without enforcement. It is unreasonable for anyone to argue that the court is not biased and does not fulfill it's mandate of doing what is in the best interests of the children involved. It is also unreasonable to argue that any father would have been jailed for the things my ex-wife has done to our children. I have kept so much out of this because there is not enough time but I have no problem stating that many of the things she did should be considered criminal and punishable. The evidence was overwhelming and clearly showed she was poisoning the minds of the children and she went complete unpunished. As I stated at the beginning, the "ALMIGHTY DOLLAR" is priority number one. My case proves it.
Glenn Tyrrell
Going to court only takes the motivation one person to accomplish. Yet you are so quick to put the "s" on the end of parent? And when the scale is tipped in your favor? Why not!
Mike Murphy
You are assuming both parents are able to see past narcissistic, self interest. You are assuming both have all their mental faculties and can think somewhat logically with no short circuiting in the processing of information. When one is the latter they already know they are right and no book will change their mind.
Books, or indeed any self help information, serve no family if only one party to a divorce wants to read it. Perhaps if it is so good judges will order it read by all warring couples. I'll vote for that.
Right on!
That is the best comment I've read on this blog so far. EVERY parent should be ordered by the court to read Tug of War.
I bought this book excited
I bought this book excited that a family court justice may finally be helping to turn the tide against injustices towards fathers who suffer daily at the hands of the defined "best interests of the child, the politically correct parent, the automatic victim of something or other during domestic contract time, the foundation of the family and the only legally defined parent by title under the written law...MOTHER"!!!
What a waste of money and more nonsense by a judge who just wants to be a celebrity and make more money!!!
The word father not appearing as a definition of a parent is the first form of parental alienation perpetrated by the law.
Obscene financial judgements against fathers removing them from having the resources to be with their children is the second form of parent alienation perpetrated by the judge.
Allowing CAS to lie, misrepresent, misinform and display consistent agendas without consequences is the next form of parental alienation towards men.
Not holding accountable these mothers who perpetrate criminal offenses of fraud and the likes is another form of parental alienation towards fathers.
And judges covering up, ignoring the unethical miscoduct and criminal misconduct of lawyers representing these women is yet another form of parental alienation torards the father.
And all this before a father has to endure trying to see his kids after the domestic contracts are enacted and the parental alienation by the mothers.
If the author was really intereted in solving this problem instead of patting his own ego and gaining monetarily from this book, he should have addressed the corruption among officers of the court at every level and every government agency with their collective, personal, financial and politically correct agendas.
The institutions of law not only tolerate parental alienation, but promote it through their corrupt processes. In Sarnia/Lambton it is referred to as..."The Share The Wealth Club" Lawyers and every other profession make money from parental alienation!!!!!!!
Very disapointed in this book!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hope the next generation has a better understanding................
Mike Murphy
I have not yet had a chance to read the book but will when it gets to my library here in Sault Ste. Marie. Due to the bias I have encountered so far in FLAW (Family Law) my cash resources are dwindling fast and have little left to purchase it. My story is typical of many men. Some non-Divorce Industry posters are praising the Judge. Some say they are men but do not leave their name. I find that interesting they do not have the courage of their convictions. Perhaps Brownstone is the only Judge handling FLAW cases in Ontario who does things differently where Dads are concerned. Has he changed the ratio of orders for custody he approves from the 9-1 in favour of females that is consistent across Canada. I'm speaking of both contested and uncontested. Most dads have a metaphorical gun placed to their forehead by their lawyers saying give the mom custody and cut your losses now. Thus dads are marginalized to 14% visitors and cease being a legal parent. The Nanny State and the Mother (until the boyfriend moves in) are the new parents. Then the non-bio boyfriend sees the children 24/7 and increases the likelihood of a host of negative outcomes to the child including physical and emotional harm. Is Brownstone's discussion of non-represented litigants implying this is the best course of action for dads?
Did he discuss changes to the system to reduce litigation such as the following:
Entitlements to female litigants under the current regime are an inducement to take unilateral action (66-70% of divorces are initiated by the female).
Given there are no tests to get married society is encumbered with the aftermath of failed relationships. We need to be more proactive. These are steps required to get the job done better than now.
First - compulsory counselling before lawyers are hired.
All counselling would have an identifiable outcome. Reconciliation, further mitigating counselling of a more specialized nature or mediation. We currently spend $208,000,000.00 per year on women's issues alone in Ontario, none on men. Wouldn't it be useful to spend some money on "family" issues instead of one gender!
The next step would be mediation but this would be tax supported and compulsory if counselling does not get the warring parties properly focused, not including lawyers. Next if required, lawyers - if anyone can afford them. They are clearly pricing themselves out of the market and are becoming redundant for the average person. If no lawyers then the feuding couple need guidance on how to take the required steps to get to court which should be the last resort. No Fault divorce must end and all the perceived entitlements a female litigant will get including almost automatic custody and "ownership" of the children. This happens even if the female (or male as the case may be) has committed criminal acts affecting the livelihood of the other partner and ruined their career and reputation. To do this the divorce act must be changed to include a presumption of equal and shared parenting for fit parents. This gives judges no discretion which in 90% of cases they currently award or approve custody to the mother. Judges are currently part of the problem in addition to the pickpockets we call lawyers.
The best interest of the child is not met by any description I have read of Brownstone's or any other judge. By allowing a winner take all approach under the current rules dads by far are marginalized and all studies show this is clearly not in the best interest of children. Until the above are instituted not much will change but I do congratulate Judge Brownstone for taking FLAW out of the closet and putting it on the table in front of all of us. For that he gets Kudos. Most judges don't have the family jewels to rock the boat from their current conservative, feminist/marxist entrenched ideological decision making template that gives dads the boot as parents but keeps them around as wallets.
patrick
that is as true as it gets. even when the mother brakes the law by taking child from province with the help of some one they have talked to on line. The law is Broken Needs fixed. Child abuse by any one including the system is suppose to be against the law..... except some persons seem to be Above the law as far as family law is concerned. Some get away with breaking it some make money doing it or condoning it. Our CHILDREN are what matters. Fathers are not just sperm donners & bank accounts.
Gord Jones
Read the book. You will be pleased.
This judge is special - and I say that as a father who spent 8 months litigating in front of him - and winning shared custody 50-50 of my 2 children.
Mike Murphy
Thanks for the info. I'm pleased you got what you should have had as a right from the get go. I will definitely take your advice and read the book. My trial is upcoming after 4 years of trying to get at least shared custody but I have an ex who wants all her perceived entitlements and alienated the children in her efforts to get it - among many indiscretions. Actions like this Judge's should send a clear message to law makers that all is not well. Hopefully they are listening and will consult broadly with FR groups.
Who are these morons?
What kind of a moron would criticize the only judge who has had the courage to stand up and expose the shortcomings of the justice system? As a father who was twice burned by the family court system, I read Tug of War with great interest. It is clear from the book and from the author's interviews on radio and TV, that this judge is the strongest judicial ally that fathers' rights goups have. His book and his comments during interviews validate and reinforce what fathers have been saying for years: that the justice system is the most inappropriate mechanism to determine parenting disputes. Whoever is writing the negative comments on this blog (and I'm convinced it's the same person), do yourself (and the rest of us fathers who actually have some intelligence) a favour and READ THE BOOK. Go post your idiotic comments on some other blog, and stop embarrassing the rest of us fathers who think that Justice Brownstone is the best spokesperson on the Bench that we've ever had. And by the way, I too have done my research and contacted numerous fathers' rights activists in Ontario that I trust (I live in Alberta), and they all confirmed that Brownstone's record for access enforcement in Toronto is by far the best of any judge in that city. So whoever you are, Mr. Idiot, cut it out and move on!
Toronto Moron
(and I'm convinced it's the same person)
How interesting you would say that. But how little you really know. And how paranoid. Two of the critical posters on this 'blog' as you call it are family law lawyers. Several others are from at least three different provinces. Only one is from Alberta besides yourself. All of them have distinct and recent experiences wiith family law and two of those from Ontario have direct experience with the negative and biased legal decisions of Brownstone. One of them even has some of the proceedings on tape. I would perhaps suggest that the only Moron around here is you for being so easily fooled and for taking on allied status with a family law judge who, along with his colleagues does little else but destroy fathers like you and your friends. Why not start a Harvey Brownstone fan club? You would then be a supporter of a family law fascist and you would then become a neo-fascist supporter of the family law system. You might as well for all the good you are doing in battling the system. And so much for your own self pronounced intelligence
Post new comment