Canada Court Watch Home

Canada Court Watch Audio




Guy Fawkes thumbnail

Remember, Remember the 5th of November,
The gunpowder treason and plot, I see no reason why Gunpowder Treason
should ever be forgot

    ● EP-BC Home About  Issues & Petitions  TaxCap Testimonials News  Reference Meetings  Fun Stuff Members


About Area Home

Beware of the IMPOSTER!!!!
Contact Us at Equal Parenting-BC
Equal Parenting How To's
Grandparents in Equal Parenting
Equal Parenting Q & A
Equal Parenting as a Consent Agreement
Equal Parenting as a Living Will
EPA = Equal Parenting Anonymous
EPA Meeting Formats
EPR = Equal Parenting Roundups
EPT = Equal Parenting Trek
EPT March, How To
Families-4-Justice
Fathers-4-Justice
SOS & Partniers in Healing

Liberal Irwin Cotler:  "Natural Parents have NO RIGHTS"

Irwin Cotler, former Liberal "Justice" Minister robbed Canadians of their NATURAL PARENTS' Rights

Irwin Cotler - Google Search;
Irwin Cotler - Google Video

"Natural Parents have NO RIGHTS....  ONLY RESPONSIBILITIES....

"Natural Parents' Rights now  gone with my Homosexual Marriage bill"

16.10 Maximum Contact & Friendly Parent Rule has to go to conform to Judicial Practice, or Judges may be held in criminal BREACH OF TRUST"

FYI, the ideas that the State assigns Rights & Responsibilities to it's Citizen is straight from pre-war Nazi Germany.   Under the British system rights are not State-given, but God Given.

Buying into the Court's position that what rights remain are Children's Rights, is buying into the same position that "<Natural> Parents have no rights", and Canadian Children are at birth the property of the Courts.

More:  News:  Cotler, Irwin:  "Natural Parents have NO RIGHTS...;
News:  European Union;
Issues:  Paul Watson:  Nazi Origins of European Union;;;
Issues: G. Edward  Griffin ;
Issues: Fabian Socialism;

Beware of the "Parental Rights" IMPOSTER!!!!

"Natural Parent's Rights" Vs "Parent's Rights"

Be on the lookout for the "Parent's Rights" IMPOSTER.  Insist on "Natural Parents Only", please!

It comes as a big surprise to us that many groups that present themselves as "Parents Rights" groups  REFUSE to defend the  NATURAL PARENT, and  and to demand RESTORATION of Natural Parents Rights taken from Canadians in the Homosexual Marriage legislation.

Instead their position to promote the "rights" of  a "Parent" in the widest sense of the word, making NO distinction  between NATURAL PARENTS and wannaabe Legal Parents.  They have bowed to University of Victoria's  assertion that  the SCC's Trociuk Decision "endorses a Heterosexual View of the Family and must be ignored", legitimizing the ongoing Child Trafficking by the State which views Canadian children as State Property and merchandise for  sale in the lucrative Child Adoption Market  They refuse to be hampered by prior obligations to that pesky Natural Parent who thinks they can Veto an Adoption.


It appears that many "Fathers Rights" groups commonly fall in with the United Nations and Liberal Irwin Cotler's assertion that the Child's Right is to be protected, but the Natural Parent has "NO RIGHTS", making the State, not the Natural Parents the Protector of the Child..

Without Cause or Consent, no Child shall be removed from a Natural Parent!!!

More:  About:  Beware of the IMPOSTER!!!!  "Natural Parent's Rights" Vs "Parent's Rights";
News:  Lessard, Hester - Heterosexual view of Parenthood must be ignored
News:  Smith, Judge Daphne, BCSC, for Child Trafficking;
Issues:  Trociuk, Darrell;
Issues:  Child Trafficking, Canadian;
Testimonials:  Rick Fredrickson of Saskatoon

Common Law Perverted by Activist Judges and Legal Oligarchy

Chapter VII. The English Common Law. Section 57. The Norman Conquest

A beautiy of British  Common Law is that it is STATIC, and NOT DYNAMIC as these Activist Judges would have you think.

Ask a lawyer what "Common Law" is and they will likely tell you it is "Judge Made Law", and expand up this to say "Common Law is whatever the Judges are commonly saying these days"

This is completely FALSE.  The Judges are Agents of the Crown and they BY DEFINITION Judges are WITHOUT CAPACITY to make any law whatsoever.  Since 1649, only PARLIAMENT has the Capacity to make Law.

British Common law was NOT created by Judges, it was only observed and documented by individuals sent out by the newly Norman Crown after the Norman Conquest of 1066  to observe and codify the laws and customs of the various peoples of Britain..  This was done with a view to aggregate existing customs which may vary across the land,  into a unified body of Laws.  The Authority quoted by the Commoners in their administration of Common Law were frequently direct quotations from the Bible and principles of Danelaw

The process of documentation took only a couple of hundred years, and the product was a STATIC body of Law which was historical, popular, and has served in the intervening centuries as a Benchmark against which Statutory Law may be measured for "Fairness".  It does NOT change.

More:   Issues:  Common Law Perverted by Activist Judges and Legal Oligarchy;
Issues:  "Judicial Interpretation" to pervert Statutes of Parliament;
Issues:  Judicial Activism is Breach of Trust;
Issues:  Judicial Globalization is Treason

Beware of the IMPOSTER!!!! 
"Natural Parent's Rights" Vs "Parent's Rights"

Be on the lookout for the "Parent's Rights" IMPOSTER.  Insist on "Natural Parents" only, please!

It comes as a big surprise to us that many groups that present themselves as "Parents Rights" groups  do NOT subscribe our position that it is the NATURAL PARENT who's rights are being impinged upon. 

Instead their position is to promote the "rights" of  a "Parent" in the widest sense of the word, and make NO distinction for the rights of a NATURAL PARENT and a NATURAL CHILD to be with each other. 

More:  About:  Beware of the IMPOSTER!!!!  "Natural Parent's Rights" Vs "Parent's Rights"

Senator Anne Cools on the Evil of False Accusations

Anne Cools - Google Search

Anne Cools' Website
 Anne Cools on False Accusations

EP Nemesis, Liberal Hedy Fry, the Queen of FALSE ACCUSERS

"Honourable senators know that I have studied a terrible and pernicious heart of darkness that has developed in our court system, being the use of FALSE ACCUSATIONS in civil justice.

This is the mischief of litigating parties, usually mothers, suddenly within the context of divorce and within child custody proceedings falsely accusing the other party, usually fathers, of the sexual abuse of their own children.    ,,,    

These FALSE ALLEGATIONS are often made with the overt or covert complicity of their lawyers. They are a lethal weapon in the business of parental alienation. They are a tool for achieving sole custody of children and creating fatherlessness."

More:  Issues:  Cools, Senator Anne

Jay Hill, MP (Prince George – Peace River)

We are also fortunate to have Jay Hill, MP (Prince George – Peace River)  here in British Columbia. 

“I’m pushing for equality —both parents should have equal rights and equal access to their child,” Hill said. “The courts seem to start from the premise that somehow fathers aren’t responsible parents. But both parents are deemed good parents as long as the marriage lasts; why are they not when the marriage ends?”   

More:   Jay's site;
Iissues:  Hill, MP Jay.

Paul Forseth, past M.P., (New Westminster-Coquitlam-Burnaby)

We are fortunate in British Columbia to have a number of pro-family parliamentarians.  Of particular prominence is Paul Forseth, M.P. -  member of the "For the Sake of the Children" Committee, co-author of the Dissenting Opinions, and a staunch advocate of pro-family concerns.  Paul has put in many years pushing to have Equal Parenting issues brought forward to the Canadian Parliament, and faced fierce opposition from the Prime Minister.   Both Paul and Senator Cools have pressed on to redeem fathers from groups like the Status of Women (SOW) enduring multiple death threats from various radical feminist groups while serving on the Committee.  These MPs are tough.

Monday Nov.7th 2005   Dear Equal Parenting-BC:    "Conservatives are committed to Shared Parenting. The national party “Policy Declaration” that was passed by delegates at our March 2005 Montreal convention says clearly that:   65. Shared Parenting:    A Conservative Government will make the necessary changes to the Divorce Act to ensure that in the event of a marital breakdown, the Divorce Act will allow both parents and all grandparents to maintain a meaningful relationship with their children and grandchildren, unless it is clearly demonstrated not to be in the best interests of the children.    

My Liberal colleagues that served with me on the Senate-Commons committee that wrote the “For the Sake of the Children report, admitted that they have little confidence that their Party will ever enact the needed amendments to the Divorce Act, that completely fulfills the report recommendations. The NDP opposed us during the Committee process, and have never been supportive of dads.

Conservatives are the only hope for fairness and reasonableness in Divorce and Family Law. I encourage those who care, to focus their energy where it will help the most, by working to elect as many Conservatives as possible. I hope that the many who are frustrated, not become sidetracked into protest, which does nothing during an election but undercut our ability to make good things happen. The Liberals and the NDP will say anything in an election to get a vote, but they will never deliver “shared parenting”. Every vote that does not go to a Conservative in the next election is a vote against “shared parenting”. Paul Forseth MP

Betty Hinton, MP (Kamloops Thompson)

Many thanks to  Kamloops MP Betty Hinton for standing up in Parliament  for us against the State funded FATHER HATRED of the Status of Women.  For an example of Betty's provocative advocacy, see:  Betty Hinton, Kamloops Thompson MP speaks against SOW's promotion of Father Hatred

Roger Gallaway, MP (Sarnia-Lambton, ON, Liberal)

Although not from British Columbia, and less familiar to us, we cannot neglect to recognize the solid support of once Liberal MP, Rodger Gallaway of Sarnia.  Gallaway and Cools were frequently photographed together while championing the rights of children to both NATURAL PARENTS.

Arnie Hein's, "Cross My Heart" Equal Parenting Trek CA 2005

Arnie Hein "Cross My Heart" - Google Search;
Arnie Hein "Cross My Heart" - Google Video

Arnie Hein is embarking on a cross-Canada cycle to raise awareness regarding the Father being stripped of
the family by the Family Court System. He is seeking fairness.

" I want my kids back, at least half the time. I want this law that removes children from their fathers - and fathers from their children -to change. I am cycling across Canada to raise awareness of this problem.

I need other fathers to know they are not alone. I want to unify the men and children abused by this Family Court System. It is important that the general public becomes aware of this problem. "


Arnie Hein

More:  Issues:  Hein, Arnie: "Cross My Heart" Equal Parenting Trek 2005;
Meetings:  Equal Parenting Trek 2005

McKenzie & Pedersen, the "Two Robs",
Equal Parenting Bike Trek US 2006, 2007...

Robb MacKenzie Equal Parenting Bike Trek - Google Search;
Robb MacKenzie Equal Parenting Bike Trek - Google Video

Rob Pederson, Equal Parenting - Google Search;
Robert Pederson, Equal Parenting - Google Video

Cycling4Children.com Equal Parenting Bike Trek's photostream

More:  Issues:  McKenzie & Pedersen, the "Two Robs", Equal Parenting Bike Trek US 2006, 2007...;
Issues:  Smith, Ron:  DC Family Preservation Rally, Compulsory Drugging of Children;
Issues:  Compulsory Drugging of Children, Thymerisol;

Liberal Irwin Cotler:  "Natural Parents have NO RIGHTS"

Irwin Cotler, former Liberal "Justice" Minister robbed Canadians of their NATURAL PARENTS' Rights

Irwin Cotler - Google Search;
Irwin Cotler - Google Video

"Natural Parents have NO RIGHTS....  ONLY RESPONSIBILITIES....

"Natural Parents' Rights now  gone with my Homosexual Marriage bill"

16.10 Maximum Contact & Friendly Parent Rule has to go to conform to Judicial Practice, or Judges may be held in criminal BREACH OF TRUST"

FYI, the ideas that the State assigngs Rights & Responsibilities to it's Citizen is straight from pre-war Nazi Germany.   Under the British system rights are not State-given, but God Given.

Buying into the Court's position that what rights remain are Children's Rights, is buying into the same position that "<Natural> Parents have no rights", and Canadian Children are at birth the property of the Courts.

More:  News:  Cotler, Irwin:  "Natural Parents have NO RIGHTS...;
News:  European Union;
Issues:  Paul Watson:  Nazi Origins of European Union;;;
Issues: G. Edward  Griffin ;
Issues: Fabian Socialism;

Bill Graham, Pedophile Parliamentarian & Defense Minister


Bill Graham, mp - Google Search;
Bill Graham, mp - Google Video

Lawrence Metherel - Google Search

2007-06-19  Liberal MP Bill Graham announces resignation

"In spite of credible revelations dating back to April 2002 about Bill Graham, a sex addicted bi-sexual sodomizing a 15 year old male prostitute named Lawrence Metherel, Paul Martin allowed Graham to remain Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister - and eventually named him to the portfolio of Minister of Defense.

"On Sept. 28/2005 a vote was held in Parliament to raise the age of consent from 14 (one of the lowest age of consents in the world) to 16 (an age which many still consider too low).

"Bill Graham, Paul Martin, and Anne McLellan, on Sept. 28th, voted against raising the age of consent to 16

More:  News:  Graham, Bill:  Pedophile Parliamentarian, Defense Minister

Common Law Perverted by Activist Judges and Legal Oligarchy

Chapter VII. The English Common Law. Section 57. The Norman Conquest

A beautiy of British  Common Law is that it is STATIC, and NOT DYNAMIC as these Activist Judges would have you think.

Ask a lawyer what "Common Law" is and they will likely tell you it is "Judge Made Law", and expand up this to say "Common Law is whatever the Judges are commonly saying these days"

This is completely FALSE.  The Judges are Agents of the Crown and they BY DEFINITION Judges are WITHOUT CAPACITY to make any law whatsoever.  Since 1649, only PARLIAMENT has the Capacity to make Law.

British Common law was NOT created by Judges, it was only observed and documented by individuals sent out by the newly Norman Crown after the Norman Conquest of 1066  to observe and codify the laws and customs of the various peoples of Britain..  This was done with a view to aggregate existing customs which may vary across the land,  into a unified body of Laws.  The Authority quoted by the Commoners in their administration of Common Law were frequently direct quotations from the Bible and principles of Danelaw

The process of documentation took only a couple of hundred years, and the product was a STATIC body of Law which was historical, popular, and has served in the intervening centuries as a Benchmark against which Statutory Law may be measured for "Fairness".  It does NOT change.

More:   Issues:  Common Law Perverted by Activist Judges and Legal Oligarchy;
Issues:  "Judicial Interpretation" to pervert Statutes of Parliament;
Issues:  Judicial Activism is Breach of Trust;
Issues:  Judicial Globalization is Treason

Debtor's Prison, abolished in 1869 in the UK, reinstituted to appease "Femi-Nazis"

Debtor's Prison - Google Search;
Debtors Prison - Google Video;
Debtors Prison abolished - Google Search

The common practice in BC Courts when Fathers do not pay Child Support - which most of the time is merely Imputed - is to send non-paying Father to Prison until he or his family members pay the fees imposed by the Judge. 

1869-xx-xx Debtors Act 1869 (c.62), United Kingdom

Even when mothers agree that Child Support should no longer be paid, we find that the Family Enforcement agencies, which are private contractors functioning as Bounty Hunters, typically refuse to end their claim on the father's income,.

More:  Issues:  Debtors's Prison Reinstituted;
Issues:  Passports Removed to Appease Femi-Nazis;
Issues:  Driver's Licenses removed to appease "Femi-Nazis";
Testimonials:  Jeffery, Hal & Danica;
Issues:  Imputed income;
Issues:  Child Support Fraud;

Barbara Kay, National Post

Barbara Kay - Google Search;
Barbara Kay - Google Video

"In Ontario alone, the names Cornwall, Prescott, and London became synonymous with "respectable" pedophile rings -- lawyers, doctors, police officers and Catholic clergymen -- that for decades preyed on society's most vulnerable boys."

;

2007-09-26 Forgetting the male victims of child abuse, Barbara Kay

2006-06-14  Welcome to the matriarchy, Barbara Kay;


More.... Issues:  Barbara Kay,  National Post;
Testimonials:  Prior, Byron: Sexual Abuse;
News:  Mount Cashel Orphanage, St. John's NL;
Issues:  Boys Of St. Vincent <Mount Cashel, NL>
News: Southin, Mary: BC Judge backs Pedophilia, Solicitation of Children for Sexual Activities;
News:  Ramsay, Judge David BC Judge & Pedophile
News:  Orr, Judge David:  Protection of Pedophiles in Public Service;
News:  Hickman, T. Alex, NL Judge, alleged Pedophile & Town Tyrant
Testimonials:   Earle, Shane: Mount Cashel Orphange, NL;
Testimonials: Samson, Pierre:  Duplessis Orphans, QU
News:  Duplessis Orphans:  Nazi Experiments Orphange, NL
Issues: Child Trafficking by Public Officers & Judges;
Issues:  Judicial Freemasonry
Issues:  Judicial Interpretation;
News:  Crowley, Aleister:  Luciferian Freemasonry, Homosexual Pedophilia & Pederasty;

 Philip Mayfield, Cariboo - Chilcotin

We also wish to thank retired MP Philip Mayfeild,  Cariboo - Childotin for his work in the Joint Committee.

Recovered pages of EPG website

equalparenting.net

Rights of fathers Ignored?
Both Parents Vita, Lynn Bentz
Broken Homes Mean Bleak Future
Fatherneed
Perception vs Reality
"For the Sake of the Children"
Some Facts on Families

Equal Parenting as a Consent Agreement after Divorce


The Bottom Layer: the Initial Agreement creating the "Equal Parenting Plan"

The more decisions that  can be settled in the Equal Parenting Agreement, the less trouble and expense  later in rehashing these same topics every year in the Annual Parenting Supplement.   All these settled joint decisions are set down in the legally binding "Covenants  Section" of the Equal Parenting Agreement.

The Supremacy and Legal Equality of Both Natural Parents

Any  "Equal Parenting Agreement" must establish the legal equality of both parents.  This is already guaranteed under in the  Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Sections 15.1 & 28).   Neither parent’s authority is subjugated to any third party:   This is very easy to do conceptually. 

The problem as always are the ubiquitous femiinarcissist "Women's right to Choose" types.  For these it is second nature to demand the woman's prerogative and right to murder unborn children with impunity at taxpayers expense, the right to murder their husbands and young children demanding  the greatest sympathies and leniencies of the Courts, and to "murder" their husbands and older children emotionally and financially in Family Court.   Stay clear of these ubiquitous femiinarcissists.  Do not be seduced by them.   They mean you and family members no good.  Their intent is for your harm, and once injured, to give them greater access to emotionally vulnerable women and their children.  Tales of seduction and sexual harassment in Women's Shelters abound.  All these, if in government service, are in  Breach of trust by public officer   To cover their tracks, and those of their kind, femiinarcissist "Activist Judges" have by MIS-interpretation of the Charter fabricated the fictitious "Charter Rights" of "sexual orientations" while ignoring generally the true Charter Rights of Fathers and their Sons to equality on the basis of "sex" literally prescribed TWICE in the Charter.)

Long Term Planning for Parenting, entrenched as Covenants

Anticipate all the joint decisions that have to be made in parenting until the end of high school, and  arrange them into functional periods according to chronology.  For example, plan separately the pre-school, elementary school, middle school, high school periods of Parenting.  The objective is to develop an exhaustive list, which is  to hashed over  until a consensus is reached.  What can be agreed upon is entrenched into the Agreement as Covenants. 

Determine to lay down enough of a backbone of Covenants, so that future efforts will be directed at day to day matters, rather than foundational issues, like custody and guardianship - all easy money for the legal profession, but lousy for families.  What cannot be determined in advance, and laid down in Covenants may be deferred to Annual Agreements to supplement the initial Equal Parenting Agreement.  

If at all possible, determine the "Parenting Community" for each period, and lay that out in either the Covenants or Wishes section..

Parental "Wishes" Section

In addition to a  "Covenants  Section" of the Agreement which IS binding, you can  make a non-binding statement of intent in a "Wishes Section" to guide any person caring for the child in absence of both parents.  Set you mind to the prospect of "dying" and you are having to set out your wishes to whoever is caring for you children after your "death".  For decent parents, this should be an easy and collaborative part, and provides momentum for more difficult questions.

This might be the place to begin the Agreement making  process.  It fits in well with the death of the marriage, and some of the grieving that entails.

Although not strictly binding, the Wishes Section provides any non-parent providing care, or making decisions on behalf of the child in the absence of the parents a description of the Trust placed in them.  This is also the measure by which any such non-parent is to be judged to be in breach of the Trust  placed in them by lending them parental powers in trust.

Short-Term Planning Parenting Supplements, "Annual Agreements"

An ESSENTIAL Covenant of the Equal Parenting Agreement is that Annual Parenting Supplement WILL be made yearly. 

It is prudent to include in the initial Equal Parenting Agreement what would normally be considered Annual Agreement material, to provide a preexisting agreement to fall back on if one of the parents refuses to participate in the preparation of an Annual Agreement in the future.

Embedded with in the initial Agreement and each Annual Supplement is a "Parenting Timetable" to govern which parent has autonomy on all residual day to day parenting issues on each calendar day in the year in questions

At-A-Glance® Erasable Yearly Vertical Jumbo Wall Calendar, 48" x 32", 2005Parenting Timetable:

The "Timetable"  plans a one year calendar of parenting alternation, encompassing all 52 weeks of school weeks and non-school weeks.  The Timetabled Parent is the parent obligated to provide care for the child and given the right to decide how care not already determined in the various covenants will be implemented. 

It is desirable for the parenting split ratio between parents to be close to 50% for many reasons. If the parents both live within driving distance to the child's school, it is difficult to imagine why this would not be possible. 

Remember, what alternates  in the Timetable is the OBLIGATION to provide care and the RIGHT to make a parental decisions not already established in the Covenants.  Usually the right and obligation of care is concurrent with physical care, but not necessarily. 

If for some reason the Timetabled Parent cannot be physically present with the child during their Timetabled time, we think it is preferable to leave small children especially in the care of the Non-Timetabled Parent than any third party.  Under an Equal Parenting Agreement this should not become contentious issue.  The Time-tabled Parent retains the obligation to provide care, and the right to decide how that care will be implemented (subject to the Covenants and Wishes), even while the child is in the care of the Non-Timetabled Parent. 

The Non-Timetabled Parent of course in not under obligation to provide care at such time, but if they are willing, the Timetabled parent may assign care to the Non-Timetabled Parent.. 

The Middle Layer: the Series of "Annual Parenting Supplements"

Each spring, in anticipation of the coming school year, the Equal Parenting Agreement requires a list of specific parenting decisions be reviewed, modified if necessary, and recorded in the Annual Parenting Supplement.  The usual topics to be reviewed are schooling, day care, extra-curricular activities, medical, health, how to pay for things, and so forth. 

This is typically very simple and straight forward.  Any married couple would have to do the same thing  yearly.  The Annual Agreements, often in tabular form, are written down and formalized in writing.

If for some catastrophic reason, preparation of these Annual Agreements become problematic, they may be settled by Mediation or Binding Arbitration predicated on the equality of the parents and all constraining  Covenants and guiding Wishes made in the initial Equal Parenting Agreement.. 

We tend to place a high value on maintaining a single community for both parents, the settling stability of weekly routine, and flexible  predictability.  Parents who move away move away without their kids until alternative arrangements are made.

The Top Layer: the Series of "Parenting-Time Timetables"

Embedded within the initial Equal Parenting Agreement and each Annual Supplemental Agreement is a refreshed  "Parenting-Time Timetable". On any given day, one parent is the Timetabled Parent, and the other parent is the Non-Timetabled Parent.  Neither parent’s authority is subjugated to any third party, and they themselves are of equal status, with alternating parental care and control.  

Set down in each Agreement, specific dates and times which predetermine which parent exercises parental control on any given date in the Calendar Year.  This constitutes the "Parenting-Time" Timetable.  Ideally you will have tentative Parenting-Time Timetables planned out from Divorce through until the children reach the age of consent, which will be tweaked and ratified in each Annual Parenting Supplement..  Registering the Equal Parenting Agreement and it's Annual Supplements in Provincial Court means its terms can be amended without the chronic  involvement of lawyers or their additional cost to the raising of a child.

With in a calendar year there are ? weeks of Summer Vacation, ? weeks of Standard School Weeks, and within the school term, ? weeks of School Vacation.  We recommend these all be divided as equally between the parents as practicable.  With Equal Parenting both parents have equal rights to  parenting time, but may waive these rights for practical considerations.  Equal Parenting rights are guaranteed under the Charter, but rarely complied with in Family Court.

By adhering to this ESSENTIAL principle of INDEPENDENCE on day to day parenting concerns not jointly established in the Covenants and Wishes sections of the Agreements, disagreement which are bound to occur between parents on day to day parenting are eliminated.  This independence does not permit a cantankerous parent, usually the mother, to  escalate problems with Joint Custody into a false claim sole custody predicated on the disruptions she herself created.   Traditionally, because of the most favored status of women in BC Family Courts, Mothers gain by being disruptive, while Fathers can only loose if they can't keep things on a steady keel with the mother.

The Icing on the Cake!

Just think of all the money your family will save by heading directly into an Equal Parenting Agreement!  

By the way, studies have clearly shown that the old sixties thinking  that conflict is harmful to kids is WRONG!  Conflict in marriage is not an excuse to end the "commitment" provided in marriage for your spouse and your children.  On the contrary, it is not CONFLICT that harms kids, it is protracted, UNRESOLVED CONFLICT, such as that inflicted on us after Divorce by the Family Law Industry, that creates the damage to our kids. 

Conflict is inevitable where freewill exists, within Marriage, and after Divorce.  In fact, CONFLICT DEMONSTRATING PROBLEM SOLVING  and  CONSENSUS BUILDING between equal partners is a necessary and highly beneficial environment for kids to be raised  in , and far superior to the autocratic tyranny  of a Sole Custodial Parent.  What needs to be avoided is the long term, UNRESOLVED conflict, the current practice of the Family Law Industry creates.  Long term, unresolved conflict is a problem while  the opportunity exists for one of the parents, typically the mother determines to be uncooperative or disruptive.  Many, if not most BC judges allow women to be disruptive and  make false allegations  in their bid for sole custody, even though they are instructed in the Divorce Act to remove the disruptive parent from the class of custodial parents. 

You can save all that money the lawyers will charge you to mess up your family their way, and have fun with your kids to put some icing on your cake instead.  Minimize the lawyers, and lather on the Icing!

 

 

Equal Parenting as a Consent Agreement after Divorce

 

 

Equal Parenting How To's 

Equal Parenting is like a Three Layer Cake. 

1.  The Bottom Layer:  The Initial Equal Parenting Agreement

Initial Equal Parenting Agreement creating full time, all time equality of both natural parents, subordinate to no third parties (a Constitutional right ignored by most Family Courts); a series of tentative Parenting Timetables for each year and statement of intent, or  "Wishes"; the requirement that the tentative Parenting Timetable laid out there will be reviewed and finalized annually and incorporated into the Annual Parenting Supplement.  Parental authority and discretion is always equal and unaffected by inequalities of Parenting Time allocations.

2.  Middle Layer:  The Annual Supplement

Yearly Annual Parenting Supplements for planning the school year and finalizing the Parenting Timetable for the upcoming  parenting year.  Parenting Timetable must meet the test for equality established in 1) the initial Equal Parenting Agreement.

3.  Top Layer:  Autonomy of Both Equal Parents on all matters not previously Constrained.

Parenting Timetable alternates all residual parenting questions between the two otherwise equal parents who are subordinate to no third parties.  Full autonomy of each parent during their Parenting Time as allotted in the agreed Parenting Timetable on all residual parenting questions not previously constrained by Covenants in the initial Equal Parenting Agreement, or the current Annual Parenting Supplement.  Full discretion on residual parenting with the Timetabled Parent, but flexibility encouraged and provided by Ad Hoc Agreements.

4.  Icing on the Cake.....

Forget about the Courts and your Ex, and go have fun with your kids!!!

More:  About:  Equal Parenting How To's:  Three Layer Cake;
About:  Grandparents in Equal Parenting;
About:  EPR = Equal Parenting Roundups;
About: EPT =  Equal Parenting Trek;
EP Trek Generic Calendar
:Issues:  Kinship Families or Grandparents raising Children::
About:  Grandparents in Equal Parenting

Equal Parenting Roundups for Natural Parents' Rights

An "Equal Parenting Roundup" is a gathering of all the disparate parental rights groups that are within driving distance of one another.  Whereas any group can call an "Ad Hoc" Roundup with their neihbors, we hope you will have at least one annual EP Roundup an incorporate it into the Equal Parenting Trek

An Equal Parenting Roundup is an exercise in your Freedom of Assembly and Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Assembly, following some of the traditions that established our Supremacy of Parliament.  Ideally, you will want be evangelical about your Roundup, you can add to it's end a Free Man's March

More:  About:  EPR = Equal Parenting Roundups;
About: EPT =  Equal Parenting Trek;
EP Trek Generic Calendar

No Fitness Test for Natural Parents in Family Courts

We oppose the Fitness Test incorporated by the slogan  "Both Fit Parents"

External, existing legislation on Parental Fitness is sufficient It is important that Equal Parenting legislation be SILENT on a Parental Fitness to give clear direction to the Courts.

The Doctrines of "Rights and Responsibilities" of a good Socialist now being promulgated in Schools and Family Courts is an idea developed in pre-war Nazi Germany.  They have been popularized by Peter Drucker.

Fitness Testing IS a core element of Nazism,  Eugenics, Socialism, and a fulfillment of the Peter Drucker vision for Global Socialism.  Fitness Testing of Natural Parents and Students must be stopped, and it's Practitioners fired.

Margaret Sanger was one of the original "Femi-Nazis"


More:  Issues:  Fitness Testing of Natural Parents;
Issues:  Fitness Test for Students, "Transitions" Program
News:  Georgia Guide Stones: Global De-Population


     
Copyright 2002  equalparenting-bc.ca 

 

       Disclaimer: EqualParenting-BC.Ca encourages  exercising democratic rights such as the freedom of expression, but does not by association or reference to other materials condone or sanction violence or hatred.