Truth is in a man's actions, not in someone else's blind accusations.

Click for the video
August 14 2020

Vexatious & abusive stepmother alienating child as father looks on and watched her burn
xXsilentpuppXx Parental alienation is child abuse audience: Public
Alienated child from loving mother, was told her mom is a pig and not worthy and the fa...
Re: Re: 167 Red Flags or Examples of Parental Alienation
Joani audience: Public
Sorry, not sure what you are asking here. Please contact me Joa...
Shannons councilor called CAS because my mother told Shannon that I killed my grandfather
Thomas John Wallace audience: Public
Through the bravery of others posting their autrocious stories about the people that ar...
Non Censored Affidavit of Adam A Warren Case 256/11 Sarnia Ontario February 13 2013
Adam Ashley Warren audience: Authenticated Login and access Non Censored Affidavit of Adam A Warren Case 256/11 Sarnia Ontario February 13 2013
underlying affidavit in support for a Notice of...
Re: Parental Alienation as an Expression of Domestic Violence
Stephen Coop audience: Public
Yes, WE are starting to understand this information. But the lawyers and judges need to be...

Authors & content contributions
Member Login
Page Grid

FOLLOW Brainsyntax VIA EMAIL Enter your email address and receive notifications of selective new pages by email.

Join 11080 other brainsyntax email notification followers

Searching for my children

Fathers in distress if you ever need to talk, or just vent, please message us Contact: Fathers Rights Canada
Deadly Epidemic Against Dads


To my children & To those that may be concerned ...
Advocacy Canada
Father Rights Canada / I have been in a Common law relationship for the last 10 years
Not disclosed
audience: Public

Hello good morning I have been in a common law relationship for the last 10 years....
Important Reminder: Toronto Ontario Canada Opening of Courts Ceremony Protest 2014
audience: Authenticated Login and access Important Reminder: Toronto Ontario Canada Opening of Courts Ceremony Protest 2014

The 2014 Ontario Canada Opening of Courts Ceremony Protest in Toronto Mark the Tuesday,...
Re: Father Rights Canada / as a father I have no rights and a up hill battle all the way
Karen Tokar
audience: Public

Remember, children first, which sounds like you are already doing. Don't bash their mot...
Barbie I
audience: Public

Can I stay in Ontario if our son was apprehended and taken from us by CAS or can we mov...
Family Law and FRO in Ontario a tactic used today it's disgusting and it needs to stop
Trena Thompson
audience: Public

Mentally unstable eh? I just love how 'they' label people who succeed, and call them ou...
MCFD be on notice if anything like that happens we will NOT let you put this baby at risk
Deborah Elizabeth Maddison
audience: Public

OMG, just got horrible news. MCFD is now threatening to place my child with known child...
Apparently Jody Wilson Raybould only represents the government interests
Vicky Topper
audience: Public

Mike, you are right. I just clarify and share my knowledge after 11 proceedings of the ...
Cite the Federal spanking law to demonstrate your awareness of the limits of physical disciplin
audience: Public

Hey there, I was just wondering if u know of any lawyers in my area Stratford Ontario, ...
Fathers Rights Canada - Martial arts instructor seduced him and a child resulted
Family Court Cure
audience: Authenticated Login and access Fathers Rights Canada - Martial arts instructor seduced him and a child resulted

Hello, I'm with a small group that are trying to help people suffering from Family...
The Thoughts of Targeted Parents of Parental Alienation
Taylor Stephenson
audience: Public

I know I am not a parent, but I feel I should post this for both myself and my mom<br /...

★★★ Join brainsyntax

Log On as Member


We must abandon the claim that the family court has been acting in children's best interests

Tuesday, May 6, 2014 - FamilyCourt - occupythecourts.ca

How many times have you heard or read the?phrase?”the best interests of the child?”? If you read much about family law and family courts, the probable answer is “more times than I can count.”? Indeed, establish a Google Alert for the phrase and you’ll get links to several articles, court cases, op-eds, etc.?a day, every day of the week.? In Canada the “best interests of the child” has been raised by the Supreme Court to a level of importance that trumps even constitutional considerations. 

So, with the phrase in such common usage and so vital to custody decisions, you might think that it (a) means something and (b) those using it know what it means.

But to an astonishing degree, you’d be wrong on both counts.? In fact,?the phrase is?more intuitive, a?shoot-from-the-hip type of locution.? It’s like a Rohrschach inkblot test; the interpretation given to it by the user reveals more about the user than about the phrase itself.? That’s the point attorney Chris Gottlieb was making in the New York Times recently?when she referred to determinations of the “best interests of the child” as being made “subjectively, inconsistently and often erroneously.”

Gottlieb’s quick and dirty description agrees nicely with what academic researchers have been saying for years.? As I mentioned in a piece not long ago, psychologists O’Donohue and Bradley wrote in 1999 that “[t]here is no useful operational definition of what the best interests of the child actually are.”? They went on to say that both state statutes and psychologists themselves disagree on such basic things as what should be considered relevant to determining a child’s best interests.? And since the necessary variables aren’t agreed upon, appropriate tests haven’t been developed with which to measure the best interests of a child.

And yet, day after day, week after week, year after year, family courts continue opining sagely about the best interests of the child.? Undeterred by a lack of?much on which to base their opinions, courts continue issuing their orders.? It seems that, when wandering in the wilderness, the important thing is to?avoid appearing?lost.

But now Canadian academic Paul Millar has published a book entitled “The Best Interests of Children: An Evidence-Based Approach.”? As the name indicates, Millar wants to do what should have been done decades ago – bring science to bear on the question of what benefits children when it comes to decisions about custody post-divorce or separation.? That is, he takes the novel approach of examining children’s outcomes and attempting to correlate them with things like family structure, gender, parental behaviors, divorce, etc.

His data come from?a variety of sources including the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth, but most importantly from the Central Divorce Registry of the Canadian Department of Justice.? Apparently, that’s not public information because Millar had to obtain it in its raw form via a freedom of information request.? His analysis of the data is “the first… analysis of custody data published to date, and the first attempt at predicting legal case outcomes using multivariate modelling techniques.”?

I’ll write more about Millar’s book in the future, but for now I want to focus on one aspect of his work – gender.? As I said, Canada enshrines the “best interests of the child” as the most important factor in child custody decisions, or at least that’s what the courts repeatedly?say.? But what the courts repeatedly do?is give primary custody to mothers; in fact, about 90% of primary custody in Canada goes to mothers.? As Millar says, the custody data from the Department of Justice “illustrate a pronounced reliance on stereotypical notions of gender roles: parental gender is by far the most important predictor of custody outcomes.”? So you’d think that the best interests of children must be highly correlated with gender, specifically the female gender.

But that’s not true.? In fact, “psychologists performing custody evaluations regard the gender of the parent among the least relevant considerations in custody decisions.”? What Millar calls “simple, bivariate analyses” support the conclusion that using parental gender to make custody decisions is in fact?contrary to?children’s interests.

But maybe those psychologists are wrong; maybe other factors tend to congrue with maternal custody and result in better outcomes for children.? Millar studies those other factors via a multivariate approach and determines that “parental gender is…in fact not a predictor at all of any of the child outcomes examined here; that is behavioral, educational or health outcomes.”

Therefore, “there appears to be a disconnect between the theoretical criterion of custody determinations – best interests – and what actually plays out in the context of the justice system.”? And given the fact that family courts and family law say one thing – that children’s best interests are paramount – and do another – award primary custody on the basis of a factor (gender) that fails to promote children’s best interests -?”we must abandon the claim that the court has been acting in children’s best interests.”

Those opposed to fathers’ parental rights will make the argument that, if gender isn’t related to children’s outcomes, what difference can it make that 90% of primary custodians are women?? Or, as Millar asks “if either side of [a] coin is equally good, why then should it matter which side it falls on?”? His answer is nothing more than the obvious – that a judicial bias against fathers rules out half the population of potential caregivers, many of whom would be better than their female counterparts.? That necessarily means that many “children aren’t getting the best available parent,” which of course thwarts the ‘best interests’ goal.

Focused on psychology and child wellbeing?as he is, Millar omits the other important answer to the anti-dad crowd – parental rights.? If children’s outcomes are paramount, as they should be, and the gender of the parent is not an issue in child wellbeing, then the issue of parental rights takes on additional importance.? Since children aren’t affected one way or the other, it is both morally and legally wrong to exclude one sex in favor of the other in making custody determinations.

Millar’s book deals with much more than just gender and children’s outcomes, but on that issue alone, it should result in major policy changes in the way custody decisions are made.? If courts and policy makers truly place the value they claim to?on the best interests of the child, they will radically change the way in which custody is decided in Canada.

But, as Millar points out, we’ve seen something like this before.? In 1986, Canada passed its second Divorce Act which clearly articulated a gender-neutral approach, going so far as to remove all gendered terms such as ‘mother,’ ‘father,’ ‘husband’ and ‘wife.’? That came against a backdrop of the establishment of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982, which itself emphasized gender neutrality.? But,
[p]paradoxically, the introduction of this legislation with its gender-neutrality coincided with a proportionally larger share of sole custody to the mother…? The introduction of modern ideas of gender neutrality has made little discernible impact on this apparent reliance (on gender) despite a manifest policy of the gender-neutral standard that is the ‘best interests of the child.’

That paradox is explained by the fact that, coincident with the the new divorce statute, came a squall of bad research purporting to show that, in some way it was mothers – not fathers -?who?lost out?in custody decisions.? Judges were duly “educated” by same and the concept of gender neutrality, so?revered in some contexts, went by the boards in that of child custody?and remains there.

The point being that,?however clear the case may be for equalizing maternal and paternal custody, there will always be those for whom the concept is anathema and who won’t?hesitate to use bogus arguments and bogus?statistics to back up their biases.

The book is “The Best Interests of Children: An Evidence-Based Approach,” University of Toronto Press, 2009.? Buy one and send?it to your friendly MP or Congressperson, perhaps with some key passages underlined.?

Occupy the Courts in Canada We need judicial accountability in courts or an independent alternative to corrupt courts.
Posted on September 8, 2013 
Canadian Researcher: ‘We must abandon the claim that the (family) court has been acting in children’s best interests’ 

September 2nd, 2010 by Robert Franklin, Esq. 


Links to attachment(s):

last update
Tuesday, May 6, 2014
legal disclaimer
Add new
Share this Page
Generate PDF file
Generate document We must abandon the claim that the family court has been acting in children's best interests
Download PDF
Search Google about
Search bing.com about
Content feed
RSS content feed: We must abandon the claim that the family court has been acting in children's best interests
Notified by email email notification on replies to this page: We must abandon the claim that the family court has been acting in children's best interests click here and receive notification of this specific page
Add your Comment Reply add your comments to: We must abandon the claim that the family court has been acting in children's best interests Reply to in a new window
Create a new page
0 replies
Access Brainsyntax

★★★ ★★★ Become a brainsyntax Member ★★★ ★★★

Access non public pages as Member
Introduce or record new content We are also assisting with content placement, subjects: Family Courts, Family Law Cases, Parental Alienation, Lawyers & Judges, Obstructions of Justice, Police, Courts, spiteful ex's, Hostile aggressive parenting, injustice, malice, obstruction, oppression and many other subjects ... Contact us

★★★ ★★★ Brainsyntax Members, Add new content, build the brainsyntax.com application ★★★ ★★★
Back || Home
Latest pages on brainsyntax.com: