From: mhnc <email@example.com>
9/1/98 5:08 PM
The reference for my book is as follows:
Child Support, Divorce, Custody, Access & Government
Policies, by W.G. Cheriton, ISBN 0-88970-101-6, Commoners' Publishing, Ottawa 1998, details how greedy
politicians, dishonest lawyers, a naive Supreme Court and heavily funded anti-father advocates have spread myths
to Canadians on divorce and child support issues. It documents the
research uncovered by a diverse array of groups representing non-custodial fathers and mothers, custodial single
fathers, second spouses, grandparents, men's groups and pro-marriage women's groups.
This book challenges the opportunistic stereotypes and rigid ideologies dominating this policy area with data,
gender-based analysis and examines what works and what does not.
This book examines "children's best interests" a maxim often given lip service, but not real commitment.
69 pages, Quality paperback, August 1998 51/2 , x81/2" $14.95
About the author:
W.G. Cheriton is a married Ottawa father of three children. He is a "stay-at-home dad" and also runs a printing
and publishing business. He was a co-founder of the Canadian men's issues magazine, "Everyman", and is involved in
a number of men's issues organizations.
About the publisher: Commoners' is a non-profit publisher of over 100 titles since 1973, in Ottawa, Canada.
Current publishing emphasis is on men's issues: parenting, marriage and divorce policy, men's health, male culture
Here's where to find some surprising facts documented by this book:
- Most of the increase in child support goes to provincial
governments, not women or children. (pg 23)
- The biggest group of deadbeats is women, not men: there are twice as many women
non-custodial parents evading child support than men. (pg 19)
- 93% of female non-custodial parents don't pay any child support.
- Less than 9% of parents believe Canadian Courts deal effectively with access. (pg 37 )
- Why Canada is a pro-divorce, anti-marriage state. (pg 7)
- 70% of marriage break-up is done by women. (pg 13)
- The only group which benefits from an improved standard of living after divorce is high-income women. (pg 12
- The real reason why Finance Minister Paul Martin switched the taxation on
child support was to cover up a billion dollar income tax
evasion problem. (pg 33)
- Proof that biased courts force men to pay up to 8.5 times the average of women at the same income levels.
- Judges award high income women more child support than low
income women, for the same father income. (pg 16)
- Custody and access problems cost parents and society more than is paid in
child support. (pg 41)
- The higher the income, the greater the bias against men and the more leniently women are treated in
child support. (pg 15)
- The actual percentage of fathers not paying child support is
between 7 and 13%. (pg 18)
- "Child Support Guidelines" are used by biased courts to
sharply increase the percentage of fathers shut out of children's lives. (pg 39)
- In the family, women are more abusive, particularly with weapons, than men. (pg 49)
- Most of the victims of domestic violence are male. (pg 47)
- Why women killing newborn babies doesn't show up in domestic violence statistics. (pg 53)
- How sole mother custody is behind much of children's problems. (pg.55)
- Why the father is more essential for successful children than the mother. (pg 54)
- Unequal pay for equal work: single custodial fathers average only $6-7 per month in
child support, about 2% of the average custodial mother. (pg 23)
- A rising rate of mental illness in separated women is causing child abuse and custody and access conflicts.
- Canada's Supreme Court says women win in family court because of their sex, not by "merit". (pg 58)
- Single mother broken families are the engine which produces most criminals, suicides, unmarried teen
pregnancies, rapists, school dropouts and drug abuse. Includes 7 pages of references and three pages of
practical alternatives to current policies. (pg 56)
How to order: Your local bookstore or directly from the publisher (VISA, MasterCard, or prepaid cheque or money
order: $14.95 plus $3.00 postage, taxes and handling. (17.95 CAN$) ($US15 including P+H for US orders):
Commoners' Publishing Inc.
631 Tubman Cr.
phone (613) 523-2444 and fax: (613) 260-0401
e-mail is firstname.lastname@example.org
The following is from an exchange of e-mail messages with Glenn Cheriton in
Fathers not ones to seek divorce*
(mothers initiate divorce at high & rising rate):
Of non-joint applications:
|Wife makes application
Or for a more complete view (all applications):
|Husband makes application
|Wife makes application
Source: Statistics Canada, Divorces 1992, Table 8, Catalogue No
I don't have a copy of the StatCan catalogue 84-213. It is not shown on
their website, neither are the above tables. Much information
from that catalogue is shown, but it is all either somewhat tainted by anti-male bias, not gender-specific, or it is
mother-friendly. To get a copy of the catalogue, it'll have to be purchased from StatCan.
Many of the problems that befall Canadian families and leads to their break-up are the
consequence of deliberate government policies that evolved and are being actively pursued, ever since the 1960s.
Those policies aim at the systematic, planned destruction of the traditional nuclear
Will the sign shown to the right
work for the Liberals in the upcoming
2004 federal elections?
The Lawn signs are ready, but will it do any good to downplay the name of the party (see lower left-hand
corner of sign) and to emphasize the face and name of the man that signed the cheques during his term as finance
minister? Will it help to erase the memory of the Liberal's or the finance minister's involvement in so much
financial chaos, mismanagement and corruption?
Do the Liberal's truly think that Canadians are that gullible?
The colour for the signs is a good choice. It brings to mind another party in another country that
had set itself the goal of eradicating the traditional nuclear family, so that a
better socialist country could be built from the remaining rubble and ruins of society.
That party's colour was red, too, and it brought corruption, financial ruin and social chaos to the country
it ostensibly ruled with an iron fist, the USSR.
Do we want to go down that road? WHS