Legal system slammed for failing families

Submitted by Matt on Sat, 2010-09-18 00:18

Article here. Excerpt:

'At one of the most stressful periods of their lives, separating couples are driven to the poorhouse by a family law system that fails to deliver workable solutions while their children are often hurt by a system that doesn’t take their opinions into account, a report by the Law Commission of Ontario says.

In one of the most in-depth looks at what ails family law in many years, the report indicts the system for draining parents’ bank accounts, ignoring expert advice in favour of simplistic solutions and leaving children out of the process.
...
While battling an ex-partner in court can be costly – cases that go to trial can ding the participants for well over $100,000 – the report’s authors said there is substantial concern judges cannot or will not step in to stop overly litigious spouses from wearing down an ex-partner through “legal bullying.”'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

I'm not really getting a good consensus on the article that summarizes a report. Its too vague and some of it looks conflicting.

'While battling an ex-partner in court can be costly –cases that go to trial can ding the participants for well over $100,000 –the report’s authors said there is substantial concern judges cannot or will not step in to stop overly litigious spouses from wearing down an ex-partner through “legal bullying.”'

It goes without saying I agree with that.

'Many social workers and mental-health professionals also complained that lawyers and judges often paid little attention to their findings, sticking instead to more simplistic concepts. For example, judges often hold to the idea that equal parenting is always best when in some cases it isn’t, it said.'

The article was basically written in a gender neutral wat but since I think their is more favoritism towards women (sometimes visa-vi "legal bullying") I become extremely suspicious when they de-emphasize shared parenting with no mention of bias already present.

'Stan Barron, a father who has spent 14 years and over $200,000 fighting with his ex-wife over custody of their children, said money was his overriding problem. Besides the burden of high legal fees, Mr. Barron said litigants must be prepared to match their ex-spouses expert for expert when it comes to mounting a case.'

The previous quote seemed to suggest more professional involvement is needed while this quote seems to argue against it due to escalation, and why wouldn't you "escalate". One so called export shouldn't be taken as fact, right?

'It also suggests ways to better co-ordinate services for those with family problems, such as police and women’s shelters, suggesting that some services should team up to share space and that case workers should communicate more.'

As far as I know this is a very bad thing (I don't have experience though). There needs to be separation of power and influence. I don't want the same POC arresting me, housing the ex, then reporting to the court. Women's shelters are HUGELY biase for obvious reasons and I want them as far removed from the "hand of the law" as possible. Sadly feminists are already involved in the training of cops. I don't know what the article meant by more communication but I want to limit the influence of women's shelters and the typical feminist BS that comes from their. And since there are far far fewer men's shelters men are only being further marginalized and put at a disposition with further cooperation of shelter and state.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by fondueguy on Sun, 2010-09-19 00:19