Volume 16, Number 1, 1999
Articles
- A Report from Canada's 'Gender War Zone': Reforming the Child-Related Provisions of the Divorce Act - Nicholas Bala
In the early 1990's Canada began a law reform process to adopt child support guidelines. Major proponents for the guidelines were women's groups, supported by governments that hoped to get more child support paid, and thereby reduce child poverty and government welfare expenditures. In 1997, at the same time as the federal government introduced the Child Support Guidlines, it ended the regime of tax deductibility of child support and taxation in the hands of recipients. The change in the tax laws increases the burden of child support on payors as well as increases government revenues. Fathers' gruops attacked the Guidelines, which primarily use the payor's income to determine child support, and argue that the family law system is biased against them. To assuage the critics of the Guideliens and gain the support for their adoption from conservative politicians, the government promised to hold hearings on the reform of the child related provision of Divorce Act. The 1998 hearings of the Parliamentary Special Joint Committee on Child Custody and Access often degenerated into a highly publicized "gender war zone" with fathers' groups being specially successful in putting stories of false allegations of abuse and access denial before sympathetic members of the Committee. The December 1998 Committee Report was not well written and had a "pro-father" slant.
The recommendations in the Committee Report included: the new concept of "shared parenting" to replace concepts of "custody and access" (but not a presumption of "joint custody"); parenting education at the time of divorce; use of parenting plans to structure post-divorce relationships; notification and court hearings before a custodial parent can move; changes to the support Guidelines to recognize expenses of non-custodial parents; and the possibility of lawyers for children. The Report attempts to promote a less adversarial approach, as well as greater rights for noncustodial parents; these two objectives may not always be compatible. Some of the most radical proposals by fathers, such as the creation of an offence for access denial, were not endorsed. Given the linkage between child support and other child related issues, it is not surprising that father's lobbied for changes and that there was significant receptivity to some of their demands. Some parts of the Report give insufficient attention to the concerns of women, especially in regard to spousal abuse and its effect on children.
In her relatively brief and vague Response (May 1999), the Minister of Justice gave cautious support to the Report. She recognized the concerns of fathers, but she was not as supportive of fathers as the Committee. She endorsed having new concepts to replace "custody and access," but believes that the specifics of the new terminology requires more study. Better enforcement of access, parenting plans and encouragement of less adversarial methods of dispute resolution were also endorsed. But she recognized that there would remain a number of high conflict divorces that need judicial resolution, and spousal violence needs to be better addressed than it was in the Committee Report. The issues are complex and contentious, and intergovernmental coordination would be desirable. The federal government plans to consult further as it develops a coordinated response to all child related issues in the Divorce Act by 2002. While broader consultation and coordination are necessary, it is not surprising that proponents of change have vigorously criticized the prospect of a three year delay in formulating a legislative response to a set of issues that has been under study for almost a decade. Even without federal legislation, the Report may encourage greater use of parenting plans, parental education at divorce, shared parenting and other innovations, but legislative reform alone will have little effect on how child related disputes are resolved.
- For the Sake of the Children: Preventing Reckless New Laws - Marie Laing
For the Sake of Children: Preventing Reckless New Laws explicates the patriarchal construction of motherhood and paternal prerogative and that women also internalize the tenets of patriarchy and demonstrate that all women can be subject to attack to maintain historical power and privilege. The struggle is not only between men and women, but between women and men who align themselves with patriarchal beliefs and structures and men and women who challenge the marginalization of their interests.
Allan Falconer Memorial Student Essay Contest Winner
- Child Support Under the Federal and Quebec Guidelines: A Step Forward or Behind? - Tina Maisonneuve
Case Comment
- In the Family Courts - taken from the Syrtash Family Law Netletter