I
was under the impression that holding a person for ransom was against the law
in Canada. Apparently this does not apply to co-parenting couples who live
apart. This applies even when the Dad is hyper-vigilant about paying support
for the child’s cost to thrive, takes an interest in the child’s school, and
wants to be an involved parent.
Mom can take her child and move to another province without so much as a bat of
an eye, and once there move every few months without ever once informing her
husband where they are living, but still expect her husband to keep up payments
for the child’s “upkeep” which amount to far more than if the child were paying
room and board.
While “Gypsy Rose Mom” is flitting about, uprooting her child from a static, if
not squalor existence every few months, Dad can have a stable management
position, with a home where the child can have her own room (rather than
sleeping with Mom), the positive influence of a two-parent household with a
step-sibling in residence, but still be held to a higher standard of being
responsible for travelling thousands of kilometers to see his child.
When work
is necessary to assist to cover the “Child Maintenance Costs”, Dad is accused
of making choices to work, rather than spend hundreds of dollars to see his
child. Keep in mind; it was a Welfare Recipient Mom who moved thousands of
kilometers away to help guarantee that her husband would have difficulty seeing
his child.
Keeping the child as a subject of ransom against her husband is contradictory
to her position that she refuses to give her husband a divorce, therefore prefers
to keep a relationship legally alive although emotionally and physically, the
relationship has been dead for many, many years.
The only choice the husband
has to pay an additional ransom of several thousand dollars through the Supreme
Court of Canada to force the divorce as a contested process.
No comments:
Post a Comment