In Canada, the federal
government shares responsibility with the provinces and
territories for family law matters. When making decisions
about children after separation and divorce, the federal
Divorce Act applies to parents who were married
and are now divorced or are planning to divorce. Provincial
or territorial laws apply to parents who were never married
or are not planning to divorce. This causes a tremendous
burden on men and women who have different results in family
law cases.
Children of married couples have more rights than those
of unmarried children or who were born outside of committed
parental relationships.
Children's rights and father's rights are subordinate
to women's rights if a women becomes a mother while not
married. The mother alone can put the child out to be adopted
even if the father is willing to raise the child by himself.
Thus the mother avoids paying child financial support for
20+ years. From a practical standpoint, it is easy in Canada
for a woman to hide the pregnancy from the potential father
by moving to another jurisdiction for the purpose of adopting
out the child without the father's consent. The provincial
government in the jurisdiction the child is born will not
support the child's right to identity and relationship with
the biological father. The mother simply states falsely
that she doesn't know or have any information about the
father.
The provincial authorities won't support the child's
identity rights by investigating. Social workers at a national
adoption conference held in the province of New Brunswick
in October 2004 overwhelming were opposed to having any
laws requiring the biological father's consent to an adoption
of his child. They expressed concerns that that adoption
would be delayed if both parents' consent was required by
law. They were also concerned that such a requirement would
cause them double the work and result in some fathers who
had consented to the adoption before the birth, changing
their minds immediately after the birth. They preferred
that children not be raised by single fathers while they
would never even consider a law requiring single mothers
to forcibly surrender their children at birth to be adopted
by couples only.
It is not uncommon to have misandrist Canadian family
court judges and misandrist social workers who prefer to
see courts award custody of a child to a couple rather than
have a child raised by a single father. When our researchers
have discussed these issues with politicians in the province
of Alberta, some politicians have stated that single men
are incapable of raising children and that the children
are better off being raised by a couple. We then asked them
if this was their same position with regards to single mothers
raising children. It wasn't.
One typical case found by our researchersinvolved a
an finding ut that he as a father30 days aftr the childwas born. He immediately proceeded with legal action to
get hi child. The family court judge ruled that the child
should remain with the couple that adopted the child shortly
after birth because they had "bonded " with the child for
30 days.
Both the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child and
the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms provide all
Canadian children with security of the person, the right
of a child to be raised by both of their biological parents
without interference from the state unless his/her parent(s)
is/are proven to be unfit, harmful or neglectful of their
child.
Provincial/territorial governments are responsible for
registering and maintaining the integrity of birth records
and insuring that children's real identities are recorded
in the provincial vital statistics registries. Generally,
most, if not all provincial authorities responsible for
vital statistics, discourage and refuse to investigate children's
identities although many provinces have penalties up to
$50,000.00 and/or 6 months in jail for persons ( the mothers
) filing false information with the vital statistics records.
No services are provided by the provinces to women needing
assistance with identifying the father of their child. Usually,
a woman seeking financial support for her child will take
a man to court.
Contrary to the normal rule of law which requires a litigant
to pay their own costs until they win their legal case,
judges frequently order the alleged father to pay for the
cost of paternity testing. In cases when the alleged father
is proven not be the father, recovery of damages for the
paternity tests, legal costs incurred, time off work, mental
stress, pain and suffering are all but nonexistent. In such
cases, the child is left without being properly identified
on their birth records. The child is left without and future
prospect of finding his/her father and is deprived on his
love, relationship support and financial support.
Although the provincial vital statistics departments
have the authority to order an investigation in support
of the child's identity rights and the child's right to
be raised by both biological parents, they don't do so and
judges won't order the government to do their jobs.
Unlike such countries as Australia and South Korea which,
in family law or case law, indemnify a husband in cases
involving a wife who falsely represents a child to be the
biological child of her husband, Canadian family law still
follows the outdated "loco parentis" concept. If
a husband is found to be a victim of paternity fraud and
has been deceived into paying for or acting as the child's
social father for a brief period of time, family court judges
often order him to pay financial support for the child,
whether or not the mother follows the parenting schedule
ordered by the family court in support of the social father-child
relationship rights. Canadian courts infrequently, if at
all, then support the child's right to a relationship with
their biological father. When found out most women that
have perpetrated paternity fraud usually terminate the child's
relationship with the "loco parentis" ( stands in
place of a parent ) father.
In 2006, the Government of Canada passed the Universal
Child Care Benefit (UCCB) in the amount of $100/month
for all families with a child under the age of 6.
The purpose is to allow families to choose the child
care (daycare) option that best suits them and to apply
the UCCB to that cost.
In Germany and some other countries there is a maximum
amount of child financial support paid by a parent. Not
so in Canada. The most we have heard of in Canada is $65,000
per month for 1 child, tax free. Obviously, amounts paid
beyond the needs of children are really a form of wealth
transfer or disguised spousal support.
It is not in the best interests of children to provide
them with substantially more than there daily needs. Children
need to learn the value of money and become educated on
the value of the work ethic. Children of divorce quickly
learn that the parent with the majority of the parenting
time controls the purse strings. Canadian family law generally
doesn't require any accountability of the funds received
by parents receiving child financial support from another
parent.
Canadian family law in divorce/separation even subordinates
the rights of one adult to another adult. We have heard
on TV, the statements made by one of Canada's top family
law lawyers who stated that adult offspring of divorced
parents are "disadvantaged" as a result of the divorce and
therefore should be entitled to at least 2 university degrees
paid for by the parent that was paying support while the
offspring was a child. In contrast, parents that are married
are not required to pay for their adult offspring's university/college
education. In cases involving an offspring whose parents
are divorced, they are not entitled to receive the "child
support" even though they are an adult. The money has to
be paid in nearly all cases to the parent that may not even
be providing anything for the adult offspring attending
University in another province.
The mandate of the Canadian Children's Rights Council
doesn't usually deal with issues of public policy for adult
offspring but in the spirit of the provisions of the UN
Convention on the Rights of the Child that deal with the
need for high quality, free universal education, we advocate
for a comprehensive national post- secondary education policy
to benefit all young adults and the future of Canada. Currently,
most young adults that attended universities or colleges
graduate with large debts resulting from student loans used
to finance their education. Such a burden delays the development
of these young adults in both their personal lives and in
their careers.
The "Child Support Guidelines" used by most provinces
and provided by the Government of Canada do not generally
consider any expenses for children living with a parent
less than 40% of the time. Thus government policy in Canada
promotes the exclusion of one of the child's parents from
the child's life in cases of divorce, separation or for
parents that never were in a relationship. In most cases,
parents with less than 40% of the overall parenting time
(usually the father) pays the parent with the majority of
parenting time (usually the mother) no matter what the income
is of either parent. The winner of the divorce legal battle
takes all.
For example, a disabled father which has a court order
to parent his child 35% of the overall time and making $12,000
per year living in poverty pays child support to a mother
who makes $150,000.00 per year. The father will likely not
actually parent his children at all because he can't afford
to pay for transportation to his home, food, clothing or
shelter during his parenting time.
Child financial support is generally not deductible for
income tax purposes by the payor and is generally not taxable
income by the recipient parent. When this was changed by
the federal government in 1997, the net affect on families
was estimated to be $300 million dollars less for families
involving divorce net after taxes per year.
Parents that receive child support which is collected
by provincial child support collection agencies which jail
parents that are out of work.
Articles have been written about how they take drivers licenses
away from truck drivers that are unemployed stopping
them from gaining future employment and paying child support.
Child support payments aren't based on payor's incomes necessarily.
Litigation in family law courts is required to make changes
and promotes fighting between parents. The winner
tales all approach promoted by the family laws of Canada
damages everyone.
The family law system requires lengthy, complex litigation
to have simple adjustments made to payments for child financial
support. The federal government in 1997 planned to have
rates changed yearly as support payors incomes changed.
It never happened. Support payors that have become disabled
and live in poverty still are threatened by the provincial
authorities with jail for payments owing on income they
didn't earn. Most provinces don't pay for legal aid lawyers
to take such cases back to court to get payments adjusted
to a level based on the income of the support payor. The
social safety net, the Employment Insurance (EI) program,
provided federally had the benefits reduced so much that
it no longer substantially provides insurance in the event
of parents loosing their jobs, being laid off and the like.
Part time wage earners, many of them poor single mothers,
don't qualify for EI benefits because the time worked requirements
per monthly period have been increased and their benefits
therefore eliminated totally. Canadians wonder why Employment
Insurance is called "insurance" since the system eliminates
such a high number of people that pay into it but who can't
collect benefits.
In the late 1990's Canada's largest daily newspaper,
The Toronto Star, ran a series of articles on child poverty.
The Canadian Children's Rights Council suggested that Canadian
provinces change their policies to the same policies
as certain states of the U.S.A.. The Toronto Star suggested
the same should become public policy across Canada.
The policy change we sought was to let parents on social
assistance keep child financial support paid in family law
cases up to a limit at which the receiving family is not
living in poverty. It currently is "clawed back".
In a typical case, when a support recipient parent receives
say $500.00 per month for child financial support, their
social assistance cheque is reduced by the same amount,
so they usually, effectively, get no child support. Social
assistance rates are substantially below the poverty line.
Canada's most populous province cut back the rates paid
to social assistance recipients in the 1997 by about 23%
and since then have given a raise of a few percent per year
starting in 2005. The basic housing allowance isn't enough
to provide even modest shelter for families or singles living
in Canada's largest city.
In some countries, parents that receive child financial
support from divorced spouses receive some government guaranteed
security should the payor become medically disabled. In
Canada, a disabled parent that has the majority of the parenting
time after a divorce may qualify for a government disability
pension of a very small amount that does include some consideration
for their child living with them. No such support is available
to parents that have the majority of the parenting time
should the other parent, a support payor, become disabled.
The provincial governments of Canada have tens of millions
of dollars in their records as owing in child financial
support payments for parents that are disabled and living
in poverty, in jail, have no income, or are even dead.
The Government of Canada pays money (the National Child
Benefit Supplement - NCBS) to the poorest citizens of Canada
to assist children living in poverty. The provincial governments
then effectively takes that money from the poor by the use
of a "clawback" by the provincial government. The provincial
government reduces payments to families living in poverty
by an amount equal to what the federal government paid them.
In fact, this specific issue was addressed as a campaign
commitment by Ontario Liberal Party leader, Dalton McGuinty,
before the 2003 election. He promised the poorest people
of Ontario, Canada's most populous province, that if elected,
he would stop the "clawback". After he was elected, he then
refused to fulfill his election promise.
Maintenance Enforcement Survey: Child and spousal
support - 2004/05
The report Child Spousal Support: Maintenance
Enforcement Survey Statistics, which is available
today, provides data on the collection and enforcement
of child and spousal support payments for cases registered
with maintenance enforcement programs.
These programs were created in each province and
territory during the 1980s and 1990s to help recipients
obtain their support payments without having to go before
the courts. They handle an estimated 50% of all support
orders and agreements in Canada.
Programs vary in a number of important aspects, such
as client profile and enforcement powers and practices.
In some provinces and territories, all support orders
and agreements are automatically registered with the
maintenance enforcement program at the time of the order.
In others enrolment
is voluntary. In this situation, it is the more difficult
cases (those in arrears or default) that tend to be
registered. These differences between programs have
important implications for interpreting the survey data,
and the results should not be generalized to all support
orders in Canada.
The report includes data for Nova Scotia, New Brunswick,
Quebec and Ontario, which have mandatory registration,
and Prince Edward Island, Saskatchewan, British Columbia
and the Northwest Territories, which have voluntary
registration. Combined, they represent about 84% of
Canada's population.
As of March 31, 2005, there were nearly 364,000 cases
enrolled in a maintenance enforcement program in these
eight reporting jurisdictions. There were 2,500 cases
in Prince Edward Island, 18,200 in Nova Scotia, 13,000
in New Brunswick, 104,400 in Quebec, 178,300 in Ontario,
7,800 in Saskatchewan, 38,800 in British Columbia and
700 in the Northwest Territories.
Average monthly caseloads increased for most provinces
from 2003/04 to 2004/05. The exceptions were New Brunswick
and British Columbia, which experienced small declines.
The vast majority of cases involved a support amount
for children. On March 31, 2005, 98% of cases registered
with the maintenance enforcement program in British
Columbia included a support amount for children. The
proportion was 97% of cases in Prince Edward Island,
New Brunswick, Saskatchewan and the Northwest Territories,
and 95% in Nova Scotia.
In 2004/05, a large proportion of registered cases
in all reporting provinces and territories had a regular
monthly payment of $400 or less. On March 31, 2005,
this applied to 46% of cases in the Northwest Territories,
48% in Ontario, 58% in Quebec, 62% in British Columbia,
63% in Saskatchewan, 68% in Prince Edward Island and
New Brunswick, and 70% in Nova Scotia.
In the majority of cases registered with a maintenance
enforcement program, the payers make their regular monthly
payment in full. In March 2005, the proportion that
made the payment in full ranged from 55% of the cases
in Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia to 78% in Quebec.
Definitions, data sources and methods: survey
number
3324 (new window)
The report Child and Spousal Support: Maintenance
Enforcement Survey Statistics, 2004/05
85-228-XIE (new window) , $29.
For more information, or to enquire about the concepts,
methods or data quality of this release, contact Information
and Client Services (1-800-387-2231; 613-951-9023),
Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics.
Top court to rule on support enforcement
Canadian Press, January 16, 2007
OTTAWA A plastic surgeon accused of fleeing
the country to avoid paying support to his ex-wife and
children is raising a thorny problem for the Supreme
Court of Canada.
The question is whether divorced dads can be cited
for contempt and jailed for ignoring court orders in
such disputes. The answer could reach well beyond the
immediate case of Kenneth Dickie, his former wife and
their three now-grown children.
"It's really about how to deal with every divorced
or separated woman's worst nightmare . . . that their
husband is going to disappear or default in his support
obligations," said Harold Niman, lawyer for Leaka Dickie.
"The broader issue is how can the courts deal with
a chronic problem of non-payment of support, and the
systemic problem that raises for families across Canada."
more..
Letter to the Editor Judgment reinforces court bias
against dads
The Vancouver Province, Vancouver, British Columbia,
Thursday, August 3, 2006
The Supreme Court of Canada has again unfairly declared
open season on fathers by awarding a mother rather than
her children more rights to dad's cash.
The court's ruling says parents are obliged to support
their children in a way commensurate with their income.
If parents receive pay increases at work following
a divorce but don't give more in child support, they
can be walloped with retroactive charges.
Statistically, women are given custody of the children
in 93 per cent of Canadian court cases.
More ..
Court ruling means divorced dads could face hefty
child-support payments
The National Post ( one of Canada's 2 national newspapers),
Janice Tibbetts, CanWest News Service, Monday, July
31, 2006
OTTAWA - The Supreme Court of Canada sent a warning
to divorced parents on Monday that they better come
clean when their income goes up or they could be forced
to pay retroactive child support unless they can convince
a judge that they had a good reason for non-disclosure.
More ..
Supreme Court says divorced parents must report
pay increases
CBC News TV and Radio (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation)
Mon, July 31, 2006
Canada's top court ruled Monday that divorced and separated
parents have a duty to report increases in their income
when it comes to paying child support.
The decision could affect hundreds of thousands of parents
across the country.
The 7-0 decision by the Supreme Court of Canada means
that former spouses could face big retroactive support
payments. The court left the door open for lower courts
to decide on those payments on a case-by-case basis.
More ..
Editorial
Ruling on the money
Ottawa Sun , Ottawa, Ontario, August 1, 2006
The Supreme Court of Canada rightly decided yesterday
that divorced or separated dads who don't boost their
child support to keep pace with their income could face
hefty retroactive orders.
It seems like one of those rulings that shouldn't have
to be made in the first place. After all, "child support"
is just that -- money that goes toward paying the expenses
associated with having a child.
It has nothing to do with the former spouse or partner
and whatever may have gone wrong in the relationship.
However, experts say it's typically an argument over
custody, or some other falling-out between parents,
that triggers a battle over support money.
More ..
NEWS RELEASE
June 13, 2006
Ministry of Attorney General, British Columbia,
2006AG0027-000801
CHILD SUPPORT INITIATIVE TO HELP CHILDREN AND FAMILIES
VICTORIA BC Separated parents will be better able
to manage the financial demands of raising children
through a new pilot program launched this month in Kelowna,
Attorney General Wally Oppal announced today.
Every parent knows that raising children requires
years of dedication and care, no matter whether the
familys income level rises or falls while they are growing
up, said Oppal. This innovative Child Support Recalculation
Service will, for the first time, allow many child support
payments to be automatically changed to reflect changes
in a payors income on an annual basis without having
to return to court.
The program involves parents who pay child support
following separation or divorce. They are asked to provide
updated financial information, such as income tax returns,
which is then used to recalculate and update the child
support amount. There is no charge for the recalculation.
More ..
Sperm donor loses appeal on child supportt
The Patriot News, Friday, July 23, 2004, BY REGGIE SHEFFIELD
of The Patriot-News, Harrisburg, PA, U.S.A.
  |
Statistics Canada
Statistique Canada |
Maintenance Enforcement Survey: Child and spousal
support
January 25, 2006
The report Child Spousal Support: Maintenance
Enforcement Survey Statistics, which is available
today, provides data on the collection and enforcement
of child and spousal support payments for cases registered
with maintenance enforcement programs.
These programs were created in each province and
territory during the 1980s and 1990s to help recipients
obtain their support payments without having to go before
the courts. They handle an estimated 50% of all support
orders and agreements in Canada.
Programs vary in a number of important aspects, such
as client profile and enforcement powers and practices.
In some provinces and territories, all support orders
and agreements are automatically registered with the
maintenance enforcement program at the time of the order.
More ..
Doctor's case an issue of contempt
Surgeon thumbing his nose at courts, judge says,
but the doctor blames the system for his troubles Case
raises question of whether people found in contempt
deserve access to courts, writes Tracey Tyler
The Toronto Star ( Canada's largest daily newspaper
), by TRACEY TYLER, LEGAL AFFAIRS REPORTER, January
18, 2006
A plastic surgeon from Sarnia is enjoying a "lavish"
and "luxurious" lifestyle in the Bahamas while his ex-wife
in Canada battles for support and his children struggle
to fund their education, a judge says.
Dr. Kenneth Dickie, who earned between $656,000 and
$915,000 annually in recent years, spent time in a Toronto
jail last year for failing to fulfill his support obligations.
In 2001, a judge ordered him to pay $9,067.42 a month
to his three children, ages 18 to 23, and $2,500 a month
to his former wife, who supported him through his medical
training. When he did not comply, another judge ordered
him to provide a $150,000 letter of credit to secure
his obligations and another $100,000 as security to
cover his ex-wife's legal costs, which he did not do.
More ..
From the Government of Canada - Department of Justice
Canada
The Federal Child Support Guidelines
are amended as of May 1, 2006. These amendments include
updated Federal Child Support Tables resulting from
the actions of the Paul Martin, Prime Minister, of Canada's
Liberal Party after he was beaten in a federal election
won the the Conservative Party and before the Conservative
Party took power and formed a government.
Links to related sites
Provincial and territorial governments (new window)
Links to the departments responsible for child support
laws in each province and territory.
Provincial and territorial maintenance enforcement programs
(new window)
Child support enforcement is primarily a provincial
and territorial responsibility. Links to the departments
responsible for enforcing child support orders and agreements
in each province and territory.
Parenting After Divorce (new window)
The Department of Justice Canada's Internet site for
information on parenting after divorce.
Family Orders and Agreements Enforcement Assistance
(new window)
Child support enforcement is primarily a provincial
and territorial responsibility, but the federal government
provides the provinces and territories with enforcement
tools. Gives general information on federal laws.
Canada
Revenue Agency (new window)
Contains tax forms and information on tax credits that
may be available to parents..
Support payments must keep pace with pay
Canadian Press, by JIM BROWN, July 31, 2006, Found
in the Globe and Mail ( Canada's largest national newspaper
and various other newspapers across Canadaa
OTTAWA Divorced or separated parents who do not increase
their child support to keep pace with their rising income
could face hefty retroactive orders to pay up under
a new Supreme Court of Canada judgment.
In a 7-0 decision Monday, the court said that, as a
rule, people who do not keep their support payments
up to date as their incomes increase are not fulfilling
their legal obligations to their children.
The nuanced ruling also left plenty of room, however,
for future decisions in the lower courts to vary based
on the specific facts of each case.
For example, a parent in most cases the father might
face undue hardship in paying a retroactive award in
some circumstances.
More ..
Court backs dad, ends kid support
Payments dropped, arrearages eliminated
Kim Kozlowski / The Detroit News, U.S.A. March 24,
2006
Fathers paying child support for children who are
not biologically theirs were cheering Thursday for Doug
Richardson, who went to court and got his child support
payments stopped and what he owes wiped out.
Still, Richardson said his fight is not over. He will
continue to work to get laws in Michigan changed.
"It's a good step in the right way for others in the
court system," Richardson said, "but I have a road ahead
of me, working with (lawmakers)."
Richardson paid an estimated $80,000 in child support
over 15 years to his ex-wife even though a DNA test
showed their first son was not his. Richardson said
he paid support to his ex-wife while she lived with
the child's biological father and then later to the
biological father when the couple split up.
[full story]
With regard to child financial support
Non-custodial fathers pay 60.0 percent of the child
support they are ordered to pay. Non-custodial mothers
pay only 46.8 percent.
derived from US Census Bureau, Current Population
Survey, Table 1, April 1998
Child Support Agency forced to pay back wrongly
accused men
The Guardian, U.K. , David Hencke, Westminster
correspondent, Monday November 28, 2005
The Child Support Agency has had to refund hundreds
of thousands of pounds in maintenance payments to more
than 3,000 men after DNA tests revealed that they had
been wrongly named by mothers in paternity suits. One
in six men who took a DNA test to challenge claims by
women that they were the fathers of their children were
cleared by the results, according to official figures
disclosed by the agency..
Under CSA rules, men must start paying maintenance
the moment they are named by mothers as the father of
the child. They can challenge the ruling by asking for
a DNA test but have to pay for it themselves.
More ..
Legal fight looms over huge support payments
Canadian Press, Edmonton Sun, Toronto Sun, various
other newspapers across Canada, March 28, 2005
TORONTO -- A Toronto legal team wants the Supreme Court
of Canada to hear an appeal on behalf of four Alberta
fathers ordered to make immediate child-support payments
retroactive to 1997. Family lawyer Gary Joseph says
if the case is not heard, families across the country
may find themselves owing thousands of dollars in retroactive
support.
Joseph filed the appeal application to challenge a recent
Alberta decision requiring the fathers to pay large
sums of support - more than half of one man's annual
earnings in one case - based on changes in their incomes
over the years.
More ..
'I don't get to see her'
Man protests child support ruling
By AJAY BHARDWAJ, EDMONTON SUN, Sat, February 5,
2005
A 26-year-old Bonnyville man who recently discovered
he's not the father of a three-year-old girl says he
shouldn't have to pay her child support. A Court of
Queen's Bench Justice has said Justin Sumner must still
shoulder the $165 monthly fee because he acted as the
girl's father for two years before divorcing her mother.
"I don't want to pay child support for a kid that's
not mine," said Justin Sumner yesterday. "The real father
gets away scot-free whether he's got money or not."
More ..
Divorced dads face bigger support bills
Calgary father told higher salary means larger
payment
Calgary Herald, Suzanne Wilton, with files
from Cristin Schmitz, for CanWest News Service, Tuesday,
February 08, 2005
A Calgary man has been ordered to pay more than $100,000
in back child support in what's being described as a
landmark court ruling that could affect fathers across
Canada..
The case potentially opens the door to a flood of claims
by custodial parents -- usually moms -- seeking retroactive
payments, say family lawyers.
More ..
Ruling a big red flag for men
Calgary Sun, By MINDELLE JACOBS, Sat, February 5,
2005
If men knew more about family law, they'd run screaming
from single mothers prowling for relationships and father
figures for their children.
Any lawyer will tell you that the nature of your relationship
with a child - not biology - determines whether you're
on the hook for child support.
Sperm has nothing to do with it, the Supreme Court of
Canada ruled a few years ago.
More ..
Non-dad on hook for support
Edmonton and Calgary Sun, By TONY BLAIS, SUN MEDIA
EDMONTON -- An Edmonton judge has decided a divorced
dad has to make child support payments, even though
the child isn't his. Justin Sumner had an on-again-off-again
relationship with the woman he eventually married, Dawn
Sumner..
She already had a child from a previous relationship
with a man named Rob Duncan, and as she and Justin broke
up and reunited, Dawn was sexually involved with both
men.
When she found she was pregnant, she called Justin,
who recognized there was a possibility that Duncan was
the father, but later concluded he was the dad.
More ..
U.S. Department of Health and Humans Services data
shows that 26 percent of non-custodial fathers and 47
percent of non-custodial mothers totally default on
child support
"Canada's national newspaper for professional
women"
The FRO under scrutiny
The Women's Post,
by Leslie Whatmough, July 7th, 2005
On June 9, 2005 the McGuinty government announced
the passage of Bill 155, legislation that promised to
increase enforcement, improve fairness and enhance efficiency
at the Family Responsibility Office (FRO). However,
the legislation did not address the problem of accountability
and, as things now stand, the FRO is a threat to every
Canadian affected by a governmentregulated support and
custody arrangement system. Think of George Orwells
1984 and youll have a good picture of how issues are
handled at the FRO.
They have legal power to extort money from Canadians,
but are not responsible or accountable for their actions.
Last year an FRO staff member decided not to wait for
a court date to review the financial status of an out-of-work
truck driver and took it upon themselves to suspend
his license because he was, understandably, behind on
his payments, having lost his job earlier in the year.
Although he was looking for work, the FRO cut off the
only way he knew of to earn a living. His suicide note
explained how hed lost all hope. Is this what we want
FRO to be doing? It is one thing to chase after dead-beat
dads (this philosophy is an integrated part of the FRO
mandate), but what of the majority of people who pay
regularly and lose their job or run into tough times?
Should they too be stripped of their civil rights?
More ..
"Canada's national newspaper for professional
women"
Does the FRO have a feminist perspective?
The Women's Post,
July 7th, 2005, by Joseph Young
When families fall apart, they can make for the bitterest
of enemies. The intensity of their hostility, the personal
rhetoric, the posturing and positioning, and the utter
faithlessness of remembrance in the relationship's good
deeds and consequences is a breathtaking phenomenon.
It's as if the positive qualities and countless achievements
are struck from history as a revisionist might strike
the Holocaust. Into all of this the family court system
wades, often inelegantly. Divorce lawyers drive up the
emotional and financial toll of separation and transformation.
Family and friends frequently collude to make things
worse.
And when government decides to rear its head, well,
it's a mess for all the world to see. Witness the recent
attention on Ontarios euphemistically branded Family
Responsibility Office. A job in advertising doubtlessly
greeted the person who came up with its title, because
it suggests some sort of feel-good missionary work to
hold together the sanctity of the institution.
More ..
High court to determine if parents to pay millions
in lump-sum child support
MacLean's and various other publications, Canadian
Press, August 18, 2005, TARA BRAUTIGAM
TORONTO (CP) - Canada's highest court agreed Thursday
to hear a case that could determine whether hundreds
of thousands of divorced or separated Canadian parents
who owe millions in retroactive child support will have
to make their payments in a single lump sum..
Toronto lawyers filed the appeal on behalf of four Alberta
fathers who were ordered to make immediate child support
payments stretching back as far as 1997.
The fathers are appealing an Alberta court decision
in January that required parents with child support
payments based on old court orders and separation agreements
to pay thousands more in retroactive support to better
reflect their higher incomes.
More ..
Supreme Court agrees to hear appeal that could cost
millions in child support
MacLean's magazine, and various other publications,
Canadian Press, TARA BRAUTIGAM, August 18, 2005
TORONTO (CP) - Canada's highest court has agreed
to hear a case that's expected to determine whether
parents across the country who are either separated
or divorced would be required to pay millions of dollars
in retroactive child support..
Toronto lawyers filed the appeal on behalf of four
Alberta fathers ordered to make immediate child support
payments stretching back as far as 1997.
The appeal was launched to challenge an Alberta court
decision in January that required fathers to pay large
sums of money in child support based on changes in their
incomes over the years.
In one case, a man was required to pay more than
half of his annual earnings.
More ..
Appeal may cost parents millions
Supreme Court agrees to hear fathers' case
Thousands may face lump-sum back claims
Toronto Star, TARA BRAUTIGAM, Canadian Press,
Aug. 19, 2005
Canada's highest court will hear the appeal of four
Alberta fathers who were ordered to pay retroactive
child support in a case that could dramatically impact
the financial obligations of countless divorced or separated
Canadian parents..
Should the Supreme Court of Canada uphold the original
January ruling, it could result in hundreds of thousands
of parents being hit with lump-sum support payments
totalling millions of dollars, said Deidre Smith, one
of the lawyers leading the appeal.
Despite existing court orders and separation agreements,
the fathers were ordered by an Alberta judge to make
immediate lump-sum child support payments, some stretching
as far back as 1997, to reflect changes in their incomes,
Smith said.
One of the appellants "is about as opposite from a deadbeat
dad as you can get," Smith said from her Toronto office.
More ..
Four fathers' child-support case will go to top
court
Ruling on retroactive payment could affect hundreds
of thousands of divided families
The Globe and Mail, By DAWN WALTON, Friday, August
19, 2005 Page A4
CALGARY -- The Supreme Court of Canada agreed yesterday
to hear the appeal of four Alberta fathers, some of
whom were ordered to pay massive amounts of retroactive
child support, in a case that has implications for hundreds
of thousands of divorced and separated families across
the country.
"The overall message to Canadians is go on and sort
out your ongoing child-support issues, but if you have
a big retroactive claim you better put it on your backburner
until the Supreme Court of Canada makes a decision,"
said Deidre Smith, whose Toronto-based law firm MacDonald
& Partners is representing the Alberta men.
The fathers are appealing an Alberta Court of Appeal
decision in January that required parents with child-support
payments based on old court orders and separation agreements
to pay thousands more in retroactive support to better
reflect their higher incomes.
More ..
Justice and Attorney General - News release
Greater enforcement of family support (05/05/25)
NB 624, May 25, 2005
FREDERICTON (CNB) - Stronger enforcement measures
contained in new legislation will help put more money
into the hands of parents and children who receive family
support. Justice Minister Brad Green introduced the
new Support Enforcement Act in the legislature today.
"Children need love and support from both parents,
especially after their parents separate or divorce,"
Green said. " This new legislation will help ensure
a dependable flow of support payments to families to
help children grow up happy and healthy."
More
..
Ombud blasts child-support collections
Cites example of mother who changed name to avoid
making payments
Canadian Press, (published in various newspapers
across Canada including The Toronto Star, August 9,
2006
A name change that kept a dad from collecting child
support is just the latest in routine carelessness at
the office tasked with collecting from deadbeat parents,
Ontarios ombudsman said today.
Andre Marin called on the province to take action
after finding the Family Responsibility Office is inept
and has a ``lackadaisical attitude when it comes to
collecting outstanding child support.
He wants the provincial government to fix the system
which was set up a decade ago to enforce court-awarded
support orders because deadbeats have been having a
free ride for too long.
More ..
