Est.2007

Barbados Underground

Bringing News and Opinions to the People

Banner promoting anonymous crime reporting with a phone and contact number 1 800 TIPS (8477), featuring the Crime Stoppers logo and a QR code for submitting tips.

An Open Letter to The Prime Minister and Attorney General – Recourse for Men Under the Family Law Act

← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

CONTACT THE BLOGMASTER ONLY

Submitted by bajejun
Attorney General Adriel Brathwaite
Attorney General Adriel Brathwaite

As I listened  to the CBC Evening News of June 25 2013, where footage of the debate in parliament was focused on the Family Law Act a few questioned came to my mind. I listened as the Attorney General outlined proposed changes to the act for single WOMEN and EX-WIVES, as it relates to child support and in his words, based on “Women crying Out”.

Before I venture further, let me make this point. I strongly believe that every person, Man or Woman should take care of their responsibilities, especially when it relates to children, I believe there should never be any reason (except death) that should stop any person from taking care of their off spring.

I would also like to point out that not every man that has been placed before the law courts for child support is a delinquent father, some women use this avenue as a weapon against men in their attempt to shame these men when the relationship sours.

This brings me to the reason for writing.

Prime Minister Fruendel Stuart
Prime Minister Fruendel Stuart

From the time of Henry Forde, men have been getting the short end of the family law or maintenance act.

  • Women have been allowed to claim child support based solely on their say so, even if it is challenged by the man with proof, he will walk out of the court having to make those payments to the court. Where is our recourse?

  • Women can leave children at the doorstep of fathers and walk away, leaving the father to fully support the children without any support from the mothers and no help from the courts. Where is our recourse?

  • Women can deny fathers access to their children. Where is our recourse?

  • Women can call a man’s name as the father of her child or children, if this man challenges he has to pay for a DNA test, if his challenge proves correct, the woman walks away scotch free. Where is our recourse?

  • Women can have a man paying  child support to the court,  move the child ( without the consent of the father) out of the jurisdiction of the court (i.e out of the island) if that man stop paying support he is brought before the court and threatened with incarceration. How can you be paying for a child when you have no idea whether that child is alive or dead. Where is our  recourse ?

Mr. Prime Minister and Mr. Attorney General where are our rights as fathers? Do we need to cry out like the women in order to be treated with some measure of respectability ?

Is the Government so willing to appease women that there are willing to do so at the cost of ignoring all the injustices meted out to fathers in this country.

There are a lot of  fathers who dearly  love their children, but suffer daily at the hands of some of these unjust women. Who will help us? Don’t we deserve consideration too?

Is this not the Family Law Act, or does the definition of family not include men?

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

18 responses to “An Open Letter to The Prime Minister and Attorney General – Recourse for Men Under the Family Law Act”

  1. Simple Simon Avatar
    Simple Simon

    Very good questions.

  2. David Avatar
    David

    Why in a setup dominated by men what the author complains about exist?

    How effective is MESA?

  3. robert ross Avatar
    robert ross

    Everything this writer draws our attention to is very fair. My impression (no more) is that the courts are waking up to the sins of the mother. The recourse? – an attorney with the mind set of a bull terrier.

  4. Amused Avatar
    Amused

    @bajejun. Yes.

  5. Amused Avatar
    Amused

    On topic and may be of interest:

    http://livewirereview.com/pay-child-support/?utm_source=taboola

  6. pieceuhderockyeahright Avatar
    pieceuhderockyeahright

    Political ploys have a specific focus and objective – to so captivate their audience and seduce their victim that all reason is lost on the listener/reviewer

    I will for this instance leave the issues of ” be he not unequally yoked” out of my submission because that would only serve to dilute the issue BUT I would make this brief caution to all men (and women) when you open the legs, as deliverer or recipient of sperm to Tom Dick (no pun intended) or Harry and get (someone) pregnant, IF you do so with the village idiot, DO NOT EXPECT THAT BY SOME MIRACLE your relationship is going to be a bed of roses, that your offspring is going to be nurtured by some Mother Theresa or the environment is going to be the institute for Gifted Youth.

    In raw Bajan DO NOT BREED WID FOOLS!!! That aside here are a few words on the sentiment of dimwit Brathwaite which could equally have been Smiley Teets Dale Marshall.

    There was no consultation with those men who are subjected to this cocktax to hear the wickedness of a woman scorned who can at a whim I.e. translated having learnt that “her child fadder” dun wid her and seeing a nex woman (sometimes you jus ent have to be seeing nubody but she believe you is) and de law courts gine cum fuh you ass.

    Males in Barbados have no rights, de girl cud be selling she ass all ovah Nelson Street and you want to have equal access to your chile and the way the system works is that the woman is the better choice of caregiver causing you is a man, and you can’t change diapers, causing you handicap or, if the Baby is a girl chile, you gine fondle she parts. So led she wid she mudder.

    I weep for my country when I see that in 2013 we are still back in 1813 times and massa only tek de manacles off we wrists. We are one of the most backwards colonies the British have ever had, and yes, I did use the present tense, because we still belong to the UK our national pledge notwithstanding

    What will change this epidemic of stupidity under the Union Jack? Death, the next 25 years will permanently retire all of these slothful lawgivers, luminaries and representatives to the various cemeteries where they caanot proactively do us any harm but unfortunately during their existence here they would have bred such useless progeny in their ill thought laws and parliamentary proclamations that the next generation would have been saddled with the burden of lack of insight and the legacy of impotent men.

    Both sides

  7. pieceuhderockyeahright Avatar
    pieceuhderockyeahright

    @ David[BU]

    MESA epitomizes my point about impotence to a T. As does the Bureau of Gender Affairs both totally out of touch with the state of affairs.

    @ Ronert Ross

    I am sure that you would wish to retract that statement about a bull terrier attorney if you are mindful of the fact that most of the fellows being subjected to the cocktax can’t even afford the tax furthermore a lawyer!

    This is not the USA NOR CANADA there is no public defender and legal aid does not wuk like dat

  8. David Avatar
    David

    @Pieceahderock

    You are on point with your comment. The failure of MESA and other NGOs strikes at the heart of why our society and democracy is struggling. Ross’ mindset is what prevails, litigation. There is a lot we can do to encourage a cohesive society before the matter reaches the ‘system’. What is the report card of our agencies responsible for social care? What metric are we using to ensure their effectiveness is aligned with a plan. In a democracy all of the organs in society should be working in different ways to ensure a national goal is being targeted.

  9. robert ross Avatar
    robert ross

    Piece of…

    Maintenance, custody, access, paternity are all matters which are legally aided under the Community Legal Services Act 1981

    Divorce is not.

    The High Court, can award maintenance to a ‘Dad’ but not the Magistrates Court.

  10. robert ross Avatar
    robert ross

    David

    Oh dear. Are you just bloody stupid or what?

  11. Amused Avatar
    Amused

    @Piece Uh De Rock. Hats off, sir. You have said it all.

    Did you have a chance to review the link I posted above? I really posted it as fodder for Baffy, Miller and, latterly, Onions. But I look forward to the comments of yourself and the Bushman. For ease, the following is what the link discusses:

    “A 15-year-old boy who was raped by a 34-year-old woman now faces child support in Nebraska.

    This is the case for now 19-year-old Jeremy Steen, of Lincoln, Nebraska. In 2008, Steen was seduced and raped repeatedly by his 34-year-old baby sitter Linda Kazinsky. Sources testified that the sexual abuse took place weekly for nearly 3 years. After police were alerted, Ms. Kazinsky was arrested and charged with statutory rape and false imprisonment.

    Kazinsky was employed as a babysitter for the Steens for nearly 3 years.

    After Kazinsky’s release from Nebraska’s state prison system in 2012 she was able to regain custody of her child. The child had been a ward of the state for the first 13 months until Debra Kazinsky, Linda’s sister, was able to gain custody. After being reunited with her child, Kazinsky promptly filed for Aid and Government assistance which in turn landed Jeremy with a subpena for child support.

    Jeremy had his day in court and was ordered to pay $475 a month in child support to Linda Kazinsky as well as a whopping $23,000 in back Child Support payments.”

    An old Oxford don once told me that “MATERNITY is a matter of fact. PATERNITY is a matter of opinion.” That was in the days before DNA, of course. But few men would actually think of availing themselves of DNA testing.

    And I agree with David on the matter of litigation. I have long held that it would be far more appropriate to establish a cheap and easy form of ADR or mediation for cases like this, funded by the State with wide powers, including the power to order DNA testing.

    Therefore, I consider this proposed piece of legislation to be woefully inadequate – like using a piece of sticking plaster to cure a large abdominal wound. Not worth the paper it is written on.

  12. David Avatar
    David

    @Ross

    Anyone who is familiar with our Courts know that bulldog lawyer or not the system is not equipped to deal with family law matters. Court Orders are routinely ignored, we have judges who are not suited to try these matters. Let us not mention Þhe politics at the Child Care Board which is suppose to work closely with Court.

    About being stupid, thanks for the inspiration early on a Friday.

  13. robert ross Avatar
    robert ross

    David

    As usual you are composing. As for “inspiration” – you’re very welcome. No charge.

    Now: we all know that an adversarial system is not the best method of dealing with most things. Unfortunately, family matters ARE adversarial – the parties are mostly at each others throats and both sides lie – and often to themselves. How many divorces still go through after counseling/mediation? Of course, orders are ignored and it leads to pedigrees of orders. This works hardship for both Dads and Mums.

    The post writer has raised various issues. As I said above, I agree with what he wrote. I am yet to read any coherent alternative to an adversarial system on here and that includes from you. Yes, you can mediate. You can do a number of things – but IF the parties are not prepared to shoulder their responsibilities, what then? In essence, it’s a statement about the human condition.

  14. Amused Avatar
    Amused

    @David. It is my considerable experience that family law matters, generally speaking, take up a lot of court time, due to the visceral hatred that has often built up between the parties. I do not believe that family law matters are best handled in the atmosphere of courts, but rather in a situation of mediation that allows the parties to express themselves fully and get it all of their chests, instead of being kept on point by the court and lawyers. A situation of mediation allows the parties a far greater active participation. And in the majority of cases, this is what is really needed so that, once it is off their chests, parties can then look at the situation constructively and reach solutions that, in most cases, both sides can live with, rather than having orders imposed on them.

    Such a form of mediation is also in the best interests of children, in the case of divorces. If parents can be encouraged to get past their personal issues and mutually decide on what is best for their children, that is surely far better than having a court give an order respecting the children.

    Therefore, I am in complete agreement with you that adversarial litigation in matters of family law are old fashioned and out of date in any modern society. You will be pleased to know, David, that Canada agrees with you and the courts refer family law matters to mediation. The result is that very few family law matters actually end up in court, but rather are settled in mediation, with its far greater informality and flexibility as to processes and who can say what and to whom.

  15. robert ross Avatar
    robert ross

    Amused

    I agree. Let’s try mediating our differences.

  16. David Avatar
    David

    @Amused

    We are on the same page. The key here is the get the best result for the children especially. If there is a space where the tension can be deflated and constructive dialogue encouraged it is better than jumping into a Court System; in this case one which is not equipped to respond satisfactorily.

  17. Amused Avatar
    Amused

    @David. I got where you were coming from at once and I completely agree – any experienced, senior counsel will agree with you.

    The system in Canada, as I understand it, is that thing like divorce and, indeed, contentious estates, are filed with the courts, but must undergo a process of mandatory mediation, before the matter can proceed to a court trial. The mediators are very highly trained and skilled and their results are truly impressive. Largely it involves letting people get all their angst out, with the assistance of very highly trained family lawyers, whose focus is on preservation, not bulldog destruction. I have been most fortunate in that I have had the chance to discuss the process in depth with Canadian counsel and the practice of family law is VERY different to run-of-the-mill litigation.

    Given this tried and proven system of family law that is some decades old – and the fact that England and Wales have an equally effective system, I am surprised that we in Barbados seem to be plodding along in the dark ages with disappointing and badly outdated legislation introduced with such fanfare by the AG and (mis)represented as being progressive.

    Anyway, let is give Adriel the benefit of the doubt (which is likely the stupidest thing I have ever suggested to anyone) and see if he and the CJ manage to tie it together with this much-heralded ADR system. Although, frankly I cannot see what possible good ADR is going to do, without extensive training and strict licensing for mediators. At the moment there seems to be none of any merit whatever. This means that every out-of-work attorney is going to be setting themselves up as a mediator on the spurious and unsatisfactory basis that “we is attorneys” or “failed registrars promoted beyond our competence to the bench of the Court of Appeal.”

  18. David Avatar
    David

    Angry men
     
    MESA Chairman Ralph Boyce (Picture by Nigel Browne.)
    By anesta henry | Mon, July 01, 2013 – 12:10 AM
    MANY BARBADIAN MEN are angry at being denied access to their children by “spiteful” mothers, though they are paying child maintenance and have been granted visiting rights by the law courts.
    Chairman of the Men’s Educational Support Assoiation (MESA) Ralph Boyce made this disclosure yesterday after a service at the Vauxhall Methodist Church in Christ Church, where the installation of MESA’s nine executive members took place.
    Boyce told the DAILY NATION that in order to urgently address the matter, the provisions must be made in the law to “establish a relationship between paying child maintenance and seeing the child”.
    He said that often men visited MESA’s Garrison, St Michael office, sometimes in tears, and lamented that while they were paying the maintenance the mothers were preventing them from seeing the children.
    Please read the full story in today’s DAILY NATION, or in the eNATION edition.

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading