But First The Conclusion

The government will continue to deny even though all the info in my blog is public information.
They are already saying there is no problem, no one did anything wrong.
 Two crime titles in two years (intentionally omitted in the crime rate) followed by a child poverty record and no one did anything wrong......
I doesn't matter if everyone knows its a complete lie, its government, deny deny deny. Between now and 2020 Gen U will be impossible to deny, but.
My guess is the government will try, "no one saw this coming". Fifteen years since the report 'for the sake of the children' and what they saw was, the revenue from child support is far more important to the next election than to the next generation.
Using the numbers of single mothers on welfare and the amount of child support paid it could be as much as one quarter of a billion dollars annually, just from British Columbia with a population of 4.4 million and still single mother families are leading the charge into poverty.
There hasn't been such a brutal oppressive tax on fathers and their children in any civilised society since the dark ages.
Government says child support is for
the children, they said child support is the most important thing to a child of divorce yet its just a tax added to revenue. They say fathers should pay for their children yet the family doesn't get a dime of it. Government knows the higher the % of child support collected the higher youth problems, they know its failed our children but not their coffers.
Even with the start of governments denial they created Gen U don't expect any change. The global economy is failing because its based on colonial economics. I've put a global transportation makeover on the table as at least some future hope for Gen U. If governments are willing to let us slide closer to WW 3 then we can certainly assume the future of Gen U is of no interest.
Thats it for my reporting on the situation, now that you've read the conclusion you should quit reading, the rest is just ugly truth.

In closing I leave my children with this.

I know right now my kids aren't thinking about why they had to grow up without their father.
Its unlikely that their mothers explanation, I should have had a better lawyer, makes any sense to them. I certainly don't see how such a huge impact should even be placed in the hands of a lawyer let alone be decided by one, and I doubt they do.
I can assure my children it has nothing to do with my abilities to continue to do my job as father.
It certainly has nothing to do with having a better lawyer.
In BC as in most jurisdictions globally, if you are applying to the courts for custody through state subsidies for a legal aid lawyer you must sign over your child support rights to the state.
Any child support paid by the non custodial parent is collected and retained by the state.
Simply put it means give your mother sole custody and tax me.
I couldn't be your father so I filled my time finding out why the court ignored its principle mandate of the best interests of the child. Its done.
It was rubber stamped from the beginning, sole custody and tax, as is all the 10s of thousands of others.

undeniable

A new record high poverty report puts 80% of children in poverty living in Vancouver BC, along with 2 crime titles in 2 years the evidense is undeniable.
Sole custody is a tax grab.

The government is raising revenue on the backs of the most vulnerable children.
In 1990 the federal government voted unanimously to end child poverty by 2000. It was was worse in 2000 which was followed up with record sole custody child support decisions, because of that its again worse now.
The revenue government is raising to fund other spending is child support collected. Every single parent on welfare must sign over child support rights to government which collects and spends it.
The common arguement is fathers should pay for their children, no arguement. Should they support a social safty net funded by all tax payers that they presumably pay to improve the child's life, arguably not.
However the government feels its revenue is so important it allows the collection agency to ignore the law. It is so important that family court rules sole custody and the tax in 100% of custody cases with welfare involved, excluding homicidial drug addicts. The government uses sole custody to generate revenue but hides it by claiming it for the children yet they don't get a single dime extra. Its rubber stamped from the first hearing, taxable.
Family court has nothing to do with the best interests of the child, its all about generated revenue on the backs of the most vunerable children as per new poverty report.
The amount the government collects is staggering, BC collects a top % of child support owed. The amount collected from our population of 3 million is in the 10s of millions,,, every month.
Gender based sole custody isnt womens empowerment, its leading the charge into poverty. The government has done an excellent job convincing women poverty is the new empowerment.
Its all about the tax man and not about the children.
It is what it is but it ain't my is which is why I decided there is enough evidense of this immoral behavior and I need not collect more..
It will not matter how much government plans on spending or how much it dreams it can spend to control the results, it won't be near enough. Gen U will settle the issue by 2020.
With that I wish you all good luck avoiding the consequences.

selling the herd

The Journal switched over to comments linked to FB to clean up the comments by using Facebook names.
The previous comment section was one of the most informative and civil of any I've been on so I'm not buying the reason.
I've posted my blog and my recent  objection via Facebook so I've never hidden.
They switched over as an excuse to delete previous comments. The opportunity to say no one saw that coming the next time government would be faced with the truth needed to be preserved.
All the odds on a catastrophic spill from the gateway pipe was there. The real economic benefits of the Keystone pipeline was there. The false claims in favor of increasing raw resourse exports were all answered, with facts.
We live in a land rich in raw resources with the worlds best customer at our front door.
Those facts compelled me to write, government that backs exporting raw resources over value added is selling the herd because they're too lazy to cut the hay field.
They said there's no money in refineries even though refineries increased margins double to triple in the last few years.
They didn't have an answer why it was good for Canada to export raw and import finished products. The market is here and so could the jobs if it wasn't shipped half way around the world and back.
They said government needed the revenue to support our social programs. lol most Canadians feel they pay more than enough taxes so its more of a statement on governments fiscal management.
They said exporting eaw resources will bring the long promised prosperity. Alberta has been developing the oil sands for forty years and still spending money borrowed from our children. BC built hydro dams that powered up sawmills mines and smelters. Cheap power, lots of lumber and jobs created value added industries. Now BC exports raw logs, electricity and most concentrates along with a $1.1B deficit, to be paid by our children.
BC will save Albertans from themselves.
The journal dumped the comments because the government needs plausible deniability. Exporting raw resources is a bad environmental plan, a very bad economic plan and a disastrous political plan. Consider why government has quashed Charter rights based on where you live in order to push ahead..
Deleting the comments won't change the fact exporting raw resources is selling the herd when the population wants value added industries. The lastest story out if the PM is value added will require substantial investment by tax payers. That's not an excuse its an admission international investors rate Canada as unacceptable risk. Gen U is coming.
It certainly won't change no justice no investment.
We saw it coming even if government says no one did.

Conservative government score card

After 6 years in power.
Growing government, record growth.
Government spending, spending borrowed money at record rate.
Unfunded liability, record high.
Investor confidense, value added prosperity, record low in everything other than raw resources.
Social justice, quashing Charter rights, cooking crime rate to hide results of failed policies.
Employment rate, poor.
Youth employment, sucks to be them.
Voter turnout, majority equals 25% of eligible.
Government abuse of power, "no one did anything wrong".

Private debt, record high.
Housing equity, mortage debt from $500B to $1T.

D-

who done it

Gen U In the 1990s it was recognized that youth problems (Gen U`s parents and older siblings) were on the rise. A joint commons senate report released in 1999 called `For the Sake of the Children` put great emphasis on statistically the most important thing to a child of divorce was not losing a parent. The federal minister of justice, Anne Mclellan issued a statement that she would personally instruct the provincial AGs to abide by the report. In the years that followed not only did the courts take sole custody to its highest historical level it also flatly refused to address the historic number of parent denied children through denied access by disregarding multiple court orders. Somewhere between the federal justice committee and all the provincial courts abiding by the report as the best interests of the child there was a failure. MP Vic Toews was the Manitoba justice minister at the time but no one has asked him, was he instructed, did he instruct the courts or did the courts ignore the intent of the law? This obvious obstruction of justice, either solely or conspired, damaged literally hundreds of thousands of children creating Gen U. As 5% of single parent children make up 4 out of 5 troubled youth, prison inmates etc. increasing the number in BC from 100,000 single parent children to 300,000 has quadrupled the amount of troubled youth and the associated crime. Vancouver has the highest number of contested divorces in Canada, the highest sole custody rate and number of parent denied children. Not by any small coincidence it has the highest property crime rate in North America which has attracts the highest number of gangs per capita than any other place on the face of the planet. Because the federal government erroneous stated child support and not losing a parent is the most important thing to a child of divorce and BC collects the second highest they deny they created a huge problem, although they did respond stealthily by cooking the crime rate to hide what they have done to the parents of Gen U. The magnitude of the crime committed as weighed by the sheer damage done to the enormous amount of victims warrant criminal charges of obstruction of justice to abuse of power. Its not motherhood that needs fixing, it`s the courts... Its unfortunate the federal government is melting down over its failure to manage value added prosperity from our nature resources rather than for the crimes they have committed that have resulted in Gen U. A pipeline, really? Phoenix only needs ashes, what started the blaze in of no consequence. no justice, no investment

one short step in a very long journey

Our difference, our advantage over the rest of the animals is our ability to communicate. The ability to pass on information to others and future generations over tens of thousands of years created the intelligence used by today's society.
The information is contained in this blog.
Communicate it.

sailed the sea to land and didnt fall off the edge

With no options left its unlikely consideration to fixing the failed policies that cteated Gen U is on the list of outcomes.
The best outcome and still the best interests of the child is presumed joint physical custody.
its an unlikley outcome as its more than a decade late. A lot more would have to be done to just to avoid some of the negative aspects of Gen U. Given the strength of defence to date moreover the strength of denial to date, no one did anything wrong, and their refusal to explain why the crime stats were cooked I dont believe the government will act on the results of failed policies.
History shows the government would rather meltdown than try to get something right they have gotten wrong.
The other options look worse and so do the polls so really they might not gain much if they do the right thing but they certainly wont lose as much. Yet oddly enough the worst choice is always first choice.
Its going to be a hot summer so Im chilling and hopefully, Im hoping, a great autumn.

Thanks all

Robert

not hoped for but expected

Bill C-38 2012 as a budget and govrrnments push reads desperation and not prosperity.
The notion that after 40 years of developing the oil sands more is good while Alberta is spending borrowed money isnt in the least believable.
Value added brings prosperity but its been rejected in favor of exporting raw bitumen. The only reason given was a concern for the environment, increasing GHG through value added would harm our international reputation,,, i guess.
Making it someone elses problem is sctually producing more GHG than value added. Definetly not a believable reason to omit value added from the budget in favor of liquidating raw resources.
As previously noted investors in anything other than raw resources and currency speculators has been
absent since 2006. Value added requires investment.
I rather hoped government would see the wisdom of engaging in fixing their failed policies before now.
as expected they would prefer, as
history shows,
meltdown before changing.

update on 'War as an Investment' in 2007 posted to
poppavox.blogspot.com
Russia and China are both increasing military spending while increasing influence in Syria Iran Afghanistan and othet places that have American influences.
Are the 5000 F-35s good planning?

Sry im not impressed either and im out of sugar coating.
Enough of the expected I'll check fir some hope.

No one did anything wrong.

Thats the last word from government.
No answer yet on why they cooked the crime rate.

as we know it

Food inflation in China, EU debt, global growth in question all pushing up against the Canadian economy.
The unbalanced global economy is picking up speed and starting to wobble. Canada has sacrificed value added for the low hanging fruit. Now that Gen U is a certainty im wondering who is going to loan them a ladder.
Finding friends in the coming reality will be the true test of supporting shared parenting or supporting the distruction of the family structure.

end game

When I became became obvious the current government was supporting the courts in intentionally removing a parent, to the financial benefit of the justice industry, the most effective plan would be to restrict finances. As the creation of Gen U stems from failed federal policies the purpose is to force government, against their wishes, to fix the failed policies.
As of 2006 there has been 0 invesent in Canada in anything oyher than raw resources and currency speculation by the international investors. They basedthis decision on the science and our predictions of the coming of Gen U increasing long term downside risk.Not only are the results of those predictions in they are so bad the new government has concealed the real crime rate. They say there is no problem, no one did anything wrong.
This must change, if it takes the collapse of the parlimentary system remember they intentionally and knowingly created Gen U.
Should it require that extreme there is a contingency plan. A better and proven system of grass roots democracy, if it comes to that.

nominatedfederalgovernment.blogspot.com

After 5 years of concealment by the new government its time to force the change. The final push to force change to the best interests of the child.

PresumedJointPhysicalCustody

Changing the hue

Simply this is about children. The predictions and results of failed federel policy.

Many would have you believe this is gender angst or a war on mothers.

The fact is only 5% of single parent children end up on the wrong side of the law. The creation if Gen U is not credited to thr 5%. Gen U is the creation of record numbers of parent denied children putting many more children into the 5% range. Add the increased number of and it moves up the scale higher than 5%. That added to the 5% is the problem.

Thats what needs fixing and and not motherhood. 

If the entire wall needs to collapes to fix it, children is are just cause.

The Wall

From Pink Floyd to Deep Purple and Smoke on the Water.

Nice to see everyone read the memo.

The Canadian government has built the wall and they are up against it. i anticipate they will likely get buried as they are in denial even with bricks falling all around them.

The lack of private investment on the Pacific Gateway trsnsformed it from PPP private public participation to PP, public only. international investors realised years ago investing in Gen U is extreme high risk. Even with the on going rejection of the Canadian TPP membership the politicians prefer the 'there is no problem defence.

They still have yet to address my accusations other than to ask the criminals to stop comitting so much crime. 

It must be obvious by now to all they have no defense against the facts or the results. So much crime they had to cook the numbers.

The wall is coming down, the smoke is on the water.

the message

from the canadian government, children dont need fathers, drop dead.
fathers get it. in 1987 after the charter of rights was enacted the supreme court ruled fathers have no rights.
with the single mother family leading the charge into poverty im still waiting for mothers to get it.
the message to mothers from government is clearly, we got what we wanted, drop dead.
not only are the results of the excessive, immoral, unconstitutional and often illegal use of sole custody are in, gang capital...
gen u is coming
we get it

reply to government

The response to date from government was to go back to the criminals and ask them to stop commiting so much crime.
My response to MP Strahl





Mark.Strahl.A1@parl.gc.caMar 8
Attached, please find Mr. Strahl’s response to your email. Thank you.


Robert SmithMar 26 (6 days ago)
Robert Smith poppavox@hotmail.com Re shared parenting My previous corresponde...

Robert Smith
Mar 28 (3 days ago)
to Mark.Strahl.A1

fyi
Over a dozen years ago I said the criminal will never give up their cash cow, sole custody.
I came to this conclusion after sitting through a custody trial that is a global embarrassment to canadian rule if law and justice.
My lawyer quit the morning of the first day leaving me with only a section 15 custody and access report that recommended split custody. Further I was ordered to be a witness for her lawyer so I was only allowed questions he asked. It was pointless even being their as the judge wouldn't even allow me to present the custody report.
My presence wasn't even required at the child support hearing so they held it ex parte. The result was her legal aid lawyer getting paid out if dedicated child support funds so he could charge full rate. After the kangaroo hearing the same judge decided the lawyer should take my children's money.
Embarrassing, more than that it, defines the Canadian justice industry abusing children through the immoral, unconstitutional, and often illegal use of sole custody.
I put the plan I'm following together a decade ago. The international supporters of shared parenting have long ago understood the only was to end this crackpot get rich abuse children for votes scheme was to choke the economic life out of the profiteers including their supporters like Maximus and the Canadian government.
You were all warned to stop abusing our children and now that yhr results are in the pressure to shun Canada globally will increase cutting investment in Canada to less exemptions than raw resources.
It matters not that you are knowing collecting child support from a person on a small disablity pension that will soon have me homeless. I need not write another word, you are already a known commmodoty on the international market.
You are selling used hay packaged as fresh while I will never live on my knees under a corrupt system.
My cause is protecting the children, yours is using them, and the results are in, gang capital.

The children will win, the loses are up to you.

Government Corruption

rule of law measured in profit

Prologue


The first prime minister of Canada had to step down in his first term in the face of corruption charges. The last government was curbed for burglarizing the national treasury while the current government is under investigation for fixing the election.

A recent poll suggests when people have a problem with government they quit voting.

Canadian voter turnout is at record lows, a huge red flag this isn't just about me or even the following issues.



The Court of Public Opinion

March 9, 2012

I accuse the province of British Columbia of collecting revenue, often illegally and unconstitutionally, using failed federal policies on the backs of and to the detriment of children.

I accuse the provincial court of ignoring the best interests of the child and in taking sole custody to its highest historical level further increasing the high percentage of child support paid but retained by the province.

I accuse the federal government of having full knowledge and complicit in fabricating facts while suppressing truths with the intent of keeping the results out of the publics eye with its lock them all up tough on crime Bill.

The accusations of MMS profiting from illegal activity carried out by the same, record amount of child support ordered through record sole custody government, they're filling the coffers of are in a previous post.

I'm putting the government of Canada who has full knowledge from at least since the 1999 joint commons senate report `for the sake of the children` through to my latest contact at the federal level MP Strahl on the stand.

With the following mini pile of statements, documents, and all the science listed as exhibits I turn judgement over to the public.

I suggest you open Exhibits in a separate window for homogenous viewing.


You will hear its a provincial matter.

1 The Acts in question the provinces administer are federal Acts.

2 The thousands of complaints, infractions, failure to adhere to regulations, abuse of power through non-mandated actions used to add to the provinces coffers were filed with the authorities who also happen to be the same authorities benefiting from sole custody increasing child support and so adding to the same coffers they draw funds from.

When the best interests of the child are ignored in favour of plumping govs coffers, the result is troubled youth.

EX 1. The results are in.

Gen U

The parents of Gen U are the Vancouver rioters, property crime and gang crime perps, to the current record high youth unemployment.

Turning street age in 2015 and not peaking till 2020 they will not have wealthy boomer parents but mostly single parents and outnumbered by seniors.

Climate change, peak oil, sovereign debt, failing infrastructure, with possible much higher inflation or interest rates, more global conflict. The list is long, the possibilities are epic.

When told to put on the yoke to keep things going Gen U will say upurs.

The government has intentionally cooked the crime rate as the real rate would mean answers. Its not working very well so they are putting through tough on crime legislation. Against the advice of international crime analysts and many heading law enforcement the government intends on locking up what you will see are mostly victims of government policy anchored by increasing revenue. Cooking the crime rate is no longer good enough, they now intend on filling the mega prisons currently under construction to get them out of view of the public.

Building mega prisons while the crime rate is going down,,, don't buy that hay, its used.

The type of governance you'd expect in Iran, certainly not Canada


Father Denied, the book, condensed.

For those unfamiliar with the issues, who are conditioned to the propaganda child support is for the children and people that don't support their children deserve what they get, read on. This is about a very ugly scam on the backs of these very children. The shocking truth, child support is a failed program but it fattens government coffers, secures women's votes even though single mothers are leading the charge into poverty and you only need attend juvie day at the courts to see how well the 3 lawyers for every 2 doctors are faring.

Collecting government revenue is a business.



EX 2

US child support enforcement agencies employ more than 55,000 people in their war on
"deadbeats." Compare that with the Drug Enforcement Agency which employs a mere 1,900 agents in America's war on drugs

The results of this and more are in. Global reported Vancouver in 2009 2010 has the highest

property crime rate in North America, four times higher than NYC that has attracted the largest number of gangs per capita than any other place of the face of the planet.

EX 3

Vancouver Sun

people less likely to report crime

reported crimes has increased seven-fold - dramatic increase in property crime.

Canada is worse than other countries . . . and B.C. is worse

Not by coincidence it follows with the historically highest number of parent denied children and the second highest amount of child support collected across Canada.

Statistics Canada say they don't count this crime even though its serious as it brought the record gangs, because "the numbers are so large they don't want it driving the crime rate", as they stated in one Globe and Mail article. presto the crime rate is down.

EX 4 is the latest update on cooking the crime rate.

Study

"Data on the volume of crime have repeatedly and inexplicably been altered

retroactively"


EX 5

You will hear sole custody is needed to protect children from undefined danger

Child

Abuse and Neglect

page 20

40% of investigated families were

female-parent families (discussed in

chapter 7 of the CIS Final Report).

60% of all investigated child abuse involves the biological mother

EX 6

Senator Cools. "I receive thousands of letters as burdened and anguished Canadian families appeal for help"

The Canadian government is a strong supporter of the UN because Canada is a strong supporter of fat coffers, wealthy lawyers and the women's vote. Even if its on the backs of children with `child support is the most important thing to a child` and `children don't need fathers`.

The gang capital title says otherwise.



MEXICO CITY, February 3, 2009

UNFPA representative Arie Hoekman, a leader in the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) has declared that the breakdown of traditional families, far from being a "crisis," is actually a triumph for human rights.



EX 7

You've heard daycare is the solution for single parent families

　

Preschool Damages Children’s Social Skills

mothers of the children in daycare were more depressed

children in daycare were 17 times more hostile

　











　

Exhibits

Exhibits

EX 1

Parent denied children are


72% of all teenage murderers.
60% of rapists.
70% of kids incarcerated.
twice as likely to quit school.
11 times more likely to be violent.
3 of 4 teen suicides.
80% of the adolescents in psychiatric hospitals.
90% of runaways
Sources: National Fatherhood Initiative, US Bureau of Census, FBI

EX 2



April 10, 2009

Why the US is losing the war on drugs but winning the war against the poor.



Enforcement reports $110 billion of child support arrearages nationwide, 70 percent of the people who owe it, earn poverty level wages.

Nationally, child support enforcement agencies employ more than 55,000 people in their war on
"deadbeats." Compare that with the Drug Enforcement Agency which employs a mere 1,900 agents in America's war on drugs.

EX 3

http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=4a6bbfff-e0d3->4a76-be56-2e7068ac901e

Vancouver Police Department

"violent crime is up six per cent and drug-related crime is up by
almost eight per cent"

--------

http://www.canada.com/vancouver/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=fd58c18c-94d7-4413-9e70-11492620d17c

　



B.C. police losing battle against crime

Crime rising faster than number of officers, study shows



Chad Skelton

Vancouver Sun

Friday, November 18, 2005

Since 1962, the "clearance rate" -- the percentage of cases solved by police -- has dropped from 90 per cent to 70 per cent for homicides and from 25 per cent to eight per cent for break-and-enters, according to the study.

According to the study, which was paid for by the RCMP, the number of police officers in B.C. has kept pace with population growth over the past 40 years.

But during that same period, the number of reported crimes has increased seven-fold -- due in large part to a dramatic increase in property crime.

Asked whether the increase in crime is due to people reporting offences more often than they did in the past, Plecas disagreed -- saying survey data suggest people are less likely to report crime today than they did previously.

We have a situation where Canada is worse than other countries . . . and B.C. is worse than the rest of Canada

The study did not specifically address whether B.C.'s shortage of police may be partly responsible for its high crime rate.

But Plecas said it makes sense.

"Everything we know about criminality is if it goes unattended, people will continue the behaviour," he said.



EX 4

http://beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/archive/01177/MLI-Crime_Statisti_1177982a.pdf

àà No data on who is committing what kinds of crimes;

àà A model that inappropriately minimizes the volume (and thus the rate) of crime;

àà Data on and explanations of unreported and unsolved crimes are receiving

less attention;

àà Historical data that would allow effective comparisons of crime rates over

time have been eliminated;

àà Data on the volume of crime have repeatedly and inexplicably been altered

retroactively;

àà Most serious incident reporting and other defects in the Juristat report deny

us vital information about how much crime is committed by those who have

already had contact with the system including those on probation, bail or

conditional release, information vital to assessing existing rehabilitation and

deterrence measures.



---------------------

EX 5

Canadian

Incidence Study

of Reported Child

Abuse and Neglect

　

http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/publicat/cissr-ecirc/pdf/cmic_e.pdf

page 20

40% of investigated families were

female-parent families (discussed in

chapter 7 of the CIS Final Report).

http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/cm-vee/csca-ecve/pdf/childabuse_final_e.pdf

page 51

30% of physical abuse victims

were living in lone female-parent

families (see Table 7-1).

page 52

42% of cases of substantiated

neglect involved lone female-parent

families



EX 6

Date: Tue Feb 27, 2001 4:12am
Subject: Sen. Cools Electrifies Howard University


Canadian Senator Anne C. Cools Speaks at Howard University

on "Domestic Violence, Fatherhood, Families, and Politics"



Senator Cools. "I receive thousands of letters as burdened and anguished Canadian families appeal for help, all questioning how the governments of their beloved country could allow such injustice," she reported.

　

　

EX 7

You've heard daycare is the solution for single parent families

　

December 25, 2008

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sharedparenting/message/22997

　

http://www.garth.ca/weblog/2008/12/22/the-hypocrite/#comment-191091

http://www.garth.ca/weblog/2008/12/17/the-chameleon/#comment-189620

　

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20081213.COLETTS13-17/TPStory/Comment

　

Canada's dismal child care KAREN FAITH

December 13, 2008



The evidence of the economic and social benefits of providing regulated early-childhood care has been available to us for some time.

Why is it that a country like ours that leads by example in terms of universal health care lags so egregiously behind in the area of a national daycare strategy?

=================

　

　



---------



Study Links Child Aggression to Time in Day Care

SALT LAKE CITY, August 21, 2003



The aggression study is by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and found 17% of daycare children more aggressive, disobedient and more engaged in conflict, regardless of family background, quality or type of care and temperament.



http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2003/aug/03082108.html

　

------------







Preschool Damages Children’s Social Skills and Emotional Development

By Terry Vanderheyden

November 10, 2005

BERKELEY, California, November 10, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Preschool has a negative effect on a child’s social and emotional development, according to a study of 14,000 US preschool children.



http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/nov/05111001.html

　

------------







What Can We Learn from Quebec’s Universal

Childcare Program?

By Michael Baker, Jonathan Gruber and Kevin Milligan

February 1, 2006

　



Several measures we looked at suggest that children were worse off in the

years following the introduction of the universal childcare program. We studied a

wide range of measures of child well-being, from anxiety and hyperactivity to

social and motor skills. For almost every measure, we find that the increased use

of childcare was associated with a decrease in their well-being relative to other

children.

Furthermore, we find that several important measures of well-being show

parents to be worse off. The survey data showed that mothers of the children in

daycare were more depressed, as indicated by the significant rise in their

depression scores relative to the average.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006_docs/daycarestudy.pdf

---------------------





Study Shows Canada’s Universal Daycare Plan Has "Strikingly Negative" Consequences

TORONTO, February 2, 2006

　



In summary, the findings revealed that children in daycare were 17 times more hostile than children raised at home, and almost three times more anxious.



http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/feb/06020205.html

-------------------------



　



Largest US Child Study Finds Early Child Care Linked to Aggression and Disobedience

Results proved true regardless of quality of center-based care they received

WASHINGTON, March 26, 2007

　

Teachers reported more frequent problem behaviours such as: child demands a lot of attention; argues a lot; bragging and boasting; cruelty, bullying or meanness to others; destroys things belonging to others; disobedient at school; gets into many fights; lying or cheating; screams a lot.



http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/mar/07032607.html


-------------------

　

　





UNICEF: Daycare is "A high-stakes gamble with today's children and tomorrow's world"

By Thaddeus M. Baklinski

December 16, 2008



A study released in 2006 of universal daycare as currently offered in Quebec revealed that children in daycare were 17 times more hostile than children raised at home, and almost three times more anxious.



Preschool Damages Children’s Social Skills and Emotional Development



http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/dec/08121603.html

-------------







===================================================================



EXhibits of note



There are volumes of studies and report of the same vein, all public access.



http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/editorial/story.html?id=6fb2b0a1-ff22-41e5-a1d0-0e1d4d0f2175

　

The Province

Published: Sunday, December 16, 2007

According to the latest B.C. Progress Board report, British Columbia has the worst combined personal and property crime rate of all provinces.



http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/story.html?id=a0fd620f-e1aa-441b-83bf-92282b16a771

BC rate



Incidents of mischief went up 39 per cent from 2007 to 2008.

　



http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/011218/d011218b.htm

　

The U.S. rate of 324 aggravated assaults for every 100,000 population was more than double the Canadian rate of 143. However, the U.S. rate has been falling since 1994, culminating with a 3% decline in 2000. In contrast, the Canadian rate has remained relatively stable since 1994, but was up 7% in 2000

-----------------------



-------------------

　

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Magazine+compares+Vancouver+drug+violence+Columbia/1647448/story.html

　

Magazine compares Vancouver’s drug violence to Colombia

Canwest News Service

May 30, 2009 4:01 PM

　

It’s not the first recent example of bad European press for Vancouver. Last month, The Independent, a British newspaper, described Vancouver as a "blood-splattered" city.

　

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/intimate/injury.htm

　

Type of attack

On average between 1993 and 2004, for nonfatal intimate partner violence --
about two-thirds of female and male victims reported they were hit, slapped, or knocked down.

female victims were more likely than were their male counterparts to be grabbed, held, or tripped.
Average annual percent of attacks, by type, in nonfatal intimate partner violent crime, 1993-2004

		Percent of victims of nonfatal intimate partner violence who were attacked
Type of attack		Female		Male
Raped		7.4	%	0.9	%
Sexual assault		1.6		0.3
Attacked with firearm		0.7		0.3
Attacked with knife		2.0		7.0
Hit by thrown object		3.0		8.2
Attacked with other weapon		0.7		1.4
Hit, slapped, knocked down		63.8		67.0
Grabbed, held, tripped		52.8		27.3

================

　

　

Study, F Violence

According to local researchers Headey, Scott & de Vaus

(1999) one important

limitation of sample surveys is that they "suffer from

having just sampled

women (see e.g. Australiab Bureau of Statistics 1996),

even though two

national studies in the United states a decade ago

showed no significant

difference between physical assault rates experienced

by male and female

partners" (citing Gelles & Straus 1988, Straus &

Gelles 1990)

University of New Hampshire researcher Straus (1993)

reflecting on U.S.

studies concludes that "research on who hit first does

not support that

assaults by wives are primarily acts of self defence

or retaliation."

Some Local Research Results

(Heady et al (1999)

(1) "Men were just as likely to report being

physically assaulted by their

partners as women. Further, men and women were equally

about likely to

admit being violent themselves."

(2) "Men and women report experiencing the same level

of pain and need for

medical attention resulting from domestic violence."

(3) "Violence runs in couples. In over 50% of

partnerships in which

violence occurred both partners struck each other."

(4) "Moreover, the vast majority of those who are

violent did not have

violent parents."

Headey & colleagues (1999) say, "The first two results

ran counter to

conventional wisdom...Some degree of

confirmation...derives from the fact

that men's and women's reports on rates of domestic

violence more or less

agree. If women are to be believed (as they have been

by previous

investigators) then so are the men. Further the

results relating to women

being as violent as men are in line with some recent

American research"

Murder Suicides Are Biological Fathers More Deadly?

The article "When Dads Get Deadly" (Australian, 17

September 2003) provides

chilling statistics on filicide that challenge

conventual wisdom.

Referring to the recent Sydney murder/suicide tragedy

Christine Jackman

writes:

"despite the disproportionate amount of publicity

these crimes attract when

they occur, murder-suicides committed by a father are

among the rarest forms

of child homicide. Australian Institute of Criminology

statistics show there

were 270 child homicide incidents in Australia from

July 1989 to June 1999,

involving 287 identified offenders and resulting in

the deaths of 316

children under 15….

When children [younger than 15] are killed in

Australia, they are most

likely to be killed by a family member (66.9 per

cent), primarily a parent

(94.2 per cent)," Australian Institute Of Criminology

(AIC) research analyst

Jenny Mouzos says in her report 'Homicidal

Encounters.'

Although fathers are responsible for most cases of

filicide (the murder of

children by their parents) in Australia, these numbers

are inflated by the

number of non-biological fathers who kill children.

When Mouzos crunched figures on the distribution of

parents who killed

children by gender and biological ties, she found

biological mothers posed a

more lethal risk to their own.

Biological mothers account for about 35 per cent of

all filicides (about the

same proportion as stepfathers and de factos), while

biological fathers

account for 29 per cent."

International Research Summary

A recent book by N Z academic Fletcher (2002) sums up

the evidence from more

than 70 studies involving 60,000 people in the U S,

Canada, New Zealand,

Britain, Korea and Israel:

"The rate of violent acts (both minor and major)

reported by men and women

in intimate relationships, are roughly equivalent,

however there is a slight

tendency for both men and women to report that women

are more likely to be

the initiators of violence."

Conclusion

Family violence by wives has not been an object of

public concern. There

has been no publicity, and no funds have been invested

in ameliorating this

problem because it has not been defined as a genuine

problem.



Yuri Joakimidis

Joint Parenting Association

(References)

Heady B, Scott D & de Vaus D. Domestic Violence In

Australia: Are Women And

Men Equally Violent? Australian Social Monitor Vol 2

No 3, July 1999. pp

57-61 at 58

Australian Bureau Of Statistics. 1996. Women’s Safety

Australia. Canberra:

Australian Bureau Of Statistics (This study

commissioned by the Office Of

The Status Of Women and conducted by the ABS that

found 2.2% of women

reported being assaulted by their male partner in the

previous year)

Gelles R & Straus M 1988. Intimate Violence: The

Causes And Consequences Of

Abuse In The American Family. New York: Simon &

Schuster.

Strau M & Gelles R (eds) 1990. Physical Violence In

American Families: Risk

Factors And Adaptations To Violence in 8145 Families,

New Brunswick, NJ:

Transition

Straus M (1993) Physical Assaults By Wives, A Major

Social Problem. In R

Gelles & D Loscke (eds), Current Controversies In

Family Violence. Newbury

Park: Sage Publications.

Christine Jackman. "When Dads Get Deadly" Australian,

17 September 2003

Fletcher G. Intimate Relationships. Blackwell (2002)



http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sharedparentingcanada/message/426

http://www.canadiancrc.com/female_sexual_predators_awareness.htm

Sexual abuse by women of children and teens is a subject most parents and caregivers are not familiar with. Female sexual predators go unreported because of a lack of awareness by the public.

The best research available to us states that about 75% of sexual predators are male and 25% are female.

86% of the victims of female sexual predators aren't believed so the crimes go unreported and don't get prosecuted.

------------------------

http://www.torontofreepress.com/2004/media111204.htm

Media makes light of sexual assault on 8-year-old boy

Some in the mainline media saw no need to report the story of the sexual abuse of such a young boy in the same way that they would have reported alleged sexual assaults by a 29-year-old man on an 8-year-old girl. The most egregious was the New York Post. The Post’s headline read, "CRADLE ROBBER - GAL WHO SEDUCED BOY, 8". There is no doubt that the newspaper would not have described an alleged male who assaulted a young girl as a "cradle robber"; nor would they have used an equivalent of the word "gal" to describe him. And there is an equally unlikely chance that the act of getting the child to have sex with him would be referred to as "seduction". The New York Post obviously thinks that a sexual assault committed by an attractive blonde woman in her 20s upon a very young boy is cute.

--------------------

http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/050714/d050714a.htm

An estimated 7% of women and 6% of men in a current or previous spousal relationship encountered spousal violence during the five years up to and including 2004

"""***note*** The following occurred during the highest mother sole custody rate in history. The effect of sole custody did not influence the rate. You can draw the conclusion sole custody has no effect therefore of no value in preventing violence by either partner. vox"""

　

My Mo

　

When they told me I wasn't a father anymore they told the wrong father.

The reports all maintained I was a good enough father to be stay a father.

The reports were not allowed into evidence as the courts already had things planned. I received the following treatment because I objected to my children's denied access to me.

I now have a 25 year old struggling single mother and a burger flipping high school drop out 22 year old son.

　

In 1996 I was so shook that my children and I were being abused with temporary sole custody, I started an investigation by sitting in court for 3 years following other family trials. Diagnosed with cancer in the spring and placed my share of the home sale to cover any payments I might miss. The judge said it was unusually that I pay during a life threatening illness but I told him, "they're my kids and I'll pay for them", 1996 constant denied access even though I was fully paid up in child support.

After surgery I was given a 50% chance of living while cancer recovery was lengthened due to added concerns for my children as access in 1997 was shut down, the kids were beaten to the ground every time they asked to see me.

In 1998 the divorce trial was held. My lawyer quit that day and I was subpoenaed by her lawyer as his witness. That means I cant say anything unless its to answer a question he asks. The section 15 custody and access recommended split custody was not allowed into evidence even though the judge referenced it in her decision as an excuse for denied access. Even though the plaintiff said she had never denied access in the section 15 she admitted many frivolous instances. The judge excused the lie and the report with "she must have had a reason", but supplied no reason. Must be the same reason my children had to grow up without their father, still waiting for that answer.

In 1999 an ex parte hearing the same judge decided that the lawyer should be paid the child support the courts held. The government says the most important thing to a child is child support yet this judge decided the it was more important the lawyer got paid rather than support the children.

FMEP didn't even follow standard collection agency protocol in contacting me to see if I was healthy and looking for a job before launching into their poison pen campaign, the intent is obvious as I refused to abandoned my children until they were beaten to the ground when they asked to see me, I left to protect them from not only an abusive mother as the ministry of families just patted her on the back.

I've worked my way to the top of the 3 main industries over a 35 year period by working for a large number of diversified companies and slowing down to a 60 hr week for a rest with all of them. After many interviews and not landing any work I got the news. The collection agency had sent letters to all of them basically making me out as a dead beat when I was still out of the workforce recovering from cancer. Had they contacted me as required under collection agency protocol I would have told them I'll have np paying it off quickly as soon as I was healthy.

The mandate allows the collection agency to take action to insure payment. The action they took, and have an over whelming history of taking made payment impossible. I have repeatedly asked both FMEP and government supply the mandate that authorizes this type of punitive action knowingly removing employment and causing non-payment. Last November I went on a hunger strike for 26 to bring this issue to light. Twice they sent the police out on the pretext I was intent on harming myself. I don't think the police were impressed by being used by government in the hopes of discrediting the documented issues with a mental health card. A hunger strike has a purpose, a plan and a result of which harm is not the desired result. Obviously no one won the office pool on how long I'd last.

The final answer from the Attorney General of British Columbia, they did nothing wrong but suggest I seek redress in the courts. I had to ask him if I would be allowed to present evidence or even defend any accusation used in their defence, no reply so I moved it to the federal level. Their reply, take it back to the provincial level we don't care how or even if our laws are administered legally and with the intent they were approved under.