Fathers urged to keep fighting flawed legal system

I would like to send a message to all unwed fathers out there fighting for rights to your children. You are not alone. I think that so many fathers get a bad stereotype from the few who have done wrong. There are many fathers out there who want to see, hold, love and watch their children grow and are not allowed to.

Even if the father is on the birth certificate, he has no rights. Even if he has been their loving and supporting parent since birth, he has no rights. Even if he was there holding the mother while she was screaming at childbirth, he has no rights to see the child. No matter how much you want to see your child, it doesn’t matter unless it’s OK with the mother.

It’s not up to you; it’s all up to the mother. This upsets me. It makes me believe we have a flawed legal system. What has become of our family values? And wait a minute, didn’t it take two people to create this child? This makes me so very sad.

So, I end up saying, don’t give up hope. Keep fighting! Because in the end, I have to believe that the strong will prevail. That fairness and justice will prevail.

Ryan Nickerson

Bemidji

http://www.bemidjipioneer.com/event/article/id/25426/

__________________________________________

No Father? No Chance

The dangerous results of America's PC celebration of single motherhood are statistically clear.

by Adam Graham

In Harrisburg, the capital city of Pennsylvania, crime has become such a problem that Stanley Lawson of the NAACP has asked Governor Ed Rendell to call in the National Guard to restore order.

During the month of June, twelve young people were gunned down. Many in broad daylight.

Mr. Lawson said: "We’re beyond what the Harrisburg police department can do. We need help." Another NAACP member, Stanley Mitchell, in declaring the need to suspend some civil rights, added: "We have the civil right not to be shot."

It’s easy to attack their willingness to demand martial law with a mandatory curfew, or to quote Benjamin Franklin’s warning that those who trade essential liberty for security will have neither liberty nor security. But that misses the point. The reaction of the Harrisburg NAACP is the same reaction that will come from anyone forced to live in a war zone.

Yet Mr. Johnson blames the actions of young gang warriors on fear. It would be more apt to say that the problem is fatherlessness.

The statistics are not pretty. Of teen runaways, 90 percent come from fatherless homes. So do 85 percent of all youth currently sitting in prison and 70 percent of long-term prison inmates. The negative statistics continue seemingly without end regarding the social (63 percent of youth suicides are from fatherless homes), economic (75 percent of children in single parent homes experience poverty), and educational (71 percent of high school dropouts are from single parent homes) impacts of homes without fathers — and how the problem has become pandemic among the African American community.

I had to tip my hat to President Obama on Father’s Day for taking special care to remind fathers of their responsibility. The genuine tragedy of the president’s life is his missing father, whose acceptance and love Obama could never earn, no matter how much he achieved.

This respect for the president’s stand on fatherhood must be tempered somewhat. President Obama is trying a soft sell on fatherhood. He dare not follow in the steps of politicians like former Vice President Dan Quayle, who was viciously savaged for challenging the media’s glorification of single motherhood. Nor will the president’s toothless support for fatherhood lead him to frontally challenge the cultural prevailing winds that are leading more and more fathers out of their children’s lives.

Quayle’s attack on Murphy Brown’s positive portrayal of single motherhood was mocked. Indeed, it’s a common argument that television cannot be blamed for society’s ills. Individuals are responsible for their own actions, but to suggest that television plays no role in shaping behavior is silly.

Let’s take the following suggestion: "The Cosby Show helped us to recognize the existence of black middle class families and helped American whites see our similarities and not just our differences. Indeed, the Huxtables opened the door to the Obamas." Few would argue back: "Television has no impact on our understanding of other people or the issues. It has no impact on our thinking about anything whatsoever." To allow for the positive impact of television, while not admitting where it is harmful, is a contradiction.

Since Murphy Brown, the positive portrayal of single motherhood on television has skyrocketed. Most of these women are unlike any real single mothers I’ve known. In real life, I see the harried woman, exhausted trying to hold down a full-time job while trying to do the job of two parents at home. She is constantly on the verge of being fired due to attendance issues while trying to get her child to day care or babysitters and dealing with cancellations.

But I’ve not seen this woman on television.

On television, super single mother has nearly perfect hair and makeup and her burden doesn’t come close to reality. On top of this, celebrities routinely put their needs to feel loved and gratified above the needs of children to have a father in their lives, and thus set the example that single motherhood is cool.

Our society affirms the statement of Gloria Steinem that a woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle. That message has been sent to fathers in a thousand different ways by academic writers, entertainers, and government programs, which subsidize illegitimacy and discount the role of fatherhood. No amount of "The More You Know" public service announcements can stem that tide without confronting the forces that like a corrosive acid eat away at the institution of fatherhood.

When one begins to talk about this issue, our society’s oversensitivity kicks in. To say that you believe fatherlessness is a problem is taken as bashing single mothers (which is something only David Letterman’s allowed to do.)

Of course, I’m not bashing single mothers, but I refuse to allow political correctness to claim that one plus zero equals two. No how matter how great mom is, she’s not dad. She cannot take his place in their child’s heart no matter how hard she tries. And yes, this is also true in the reverse. Dad can’t take mom’s place either, but that social problem is less prevalent with little statistics available. We do, however, have statistical evidence revealing the negative impact of absentee fathers. Those who argue otherwise are arguing for the worthlessness of fathers from a mathematical standpoint.

Recall, from early algebra, if you were given the equation "M+ F = M" and told to solve for "F," it would be a simple exercise. F = 0 as it adds nothing to the equation. This is exactly what many modern feminists allege about fathers.

Nor should this be interpreted as a call for more abortions. Abortion, if anything, has separated men from a sense of responsibility, as our nation’s laws in effect declare a child the sole property of the mother.

On the issue of fathers, the "reality-based" community denies social studies, citing people who grew up well with only one parent or grew up poorly with two parents. These arguments are much like a smoker’s justification that Uncle Joe smoked three packs a day and lived to be eighty-five. Exceptions to a general rule don’t disprove the rule when a large body of science backs it up.

The science is ignored because it undermines the institutional ideal of self-actualization. The unhappy married couple that stays together "for the children" is mocked. The man who "comes out of the closet" and leaves his wife and children is celebrated for following his heart. Commitment and obligation are cast aside for happiness and immediate personal fulfillment.

There is a price to pay, and, like with government spending, the future generations pay the most dearly. Children have been treated as secondary considerations, as worth less than the personal gratification of their parents.

It may have been their choice to make, but I’m reminded of the words of the knight in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade after Walter Donovan drank from the false grail. "He chose poorly."

Hundreds of billions of the dollars we spend on government expenditures are the direct result of fatherlessness, from health care for poor children, to welfare, to prisons to house the young men whose substitutes for dad led them into a life of crime. America has a higher percentage of its population in prison than any nation on the face of the Earth. Somehow, there’s never quite enough space. We continually debate how we will find new space to house all the new prisoners, while ignoring the decline of fatherhood that has created the problem in the first place.

Yet with Harrisburg on the brink of martial law, this news reminds us we can only build so many jails. The message of Harrisburg is clear: a day of reckoning is coming. It seems far more likely America’s largest cities will be under siege from their father-hungry children than from al-Qaeda.

http://www.framedfathers.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=breakingnews&action=display&thread=993&page=1

___________________________________

Va. Lawyer Convicted In NH Child Support Case

CONCORD, N.H. (AP) ― A Virginia lawyer has been convicted of failing to pay about a half million dollars in child support in New Hampshire over the last seven years.

Fifty-seven-year-old Peter Mitrano of Fairfax, Va., was charged with not paying support that was ordered in 2002 by a judge in Lebanon.

He will be sentenced in October, and faces up to two years in jail.

http://wbztv.com/wireapnewsnh/Va.lawyer.convicted.2.1081581.html

__________________________

Fill out name change, child support modification and estate forms online

by Douglass Dowty / The Post-Standard

Syracuse, NY -- A new do-it-yourself site allows state residents to fill out child support modification, adult name change and estate court papers online. There will also be access to these forms at the Criminal Courthouse in Syracuse.

The completed papers can be printed and filed with the appropriate court. Estates can be no more than $30,000.

The program, called Access to Justice, can be found at www.nycourthelp.gov. From there click on the link to Do-It-Yourself Forms. Click on "Programs for statewide courts."

You will need Adobe Flash and Microsoft Word or Word Viewer to fill out the electronic forms. Both of these are available free for download at the site.

Program director Fern Fisher, who serves as Deputy Chief Administrative Judge for New York City Courts, said public access is a personal issue for her.

When she graduated law school, Fisher said her mother told her they had been forced out of their house in foreclosure because her mother didn't know how to navigate the court system.

Fisher said that made her realize how little average citizens know about filing court documents. "There are people who need help," she said.

In 2005, nearly two million people represented themselves in court. With the financial crisis, Fisher believes that number may be three million this year.

"If you're making the choice between paying the electric bill and putting food on the table, or paying for an attorney, there's no choice," she said. "You pay for the necessities first."

Access to Justice started in New York City but is now being administered to the state courts.

Future do-it-yourself projects include maternity forms, guardianship petitions and others, Fisher said.

More than 7,900 have used the forms statewide since they were put online in May, she said.

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2009/07/fill_out_name_change_child_sup.html

______________________________

Divorce Adding to Drop Out Rate

By WINK News

A new university study following thousands of kids for 20 years reports that children of divorced parents are more likely to become school drop-outs than kids whose parents stick together. The study confirms the hardship of divorce on kids, but how kids cope depends a lot on the parents.

Devon’s parents divorced when he was 13.

"You really lose your grip so easily when things aren’t alright at home," says Devon.

He says the constant fighting between his parents took its toll. "I found that most of the time, like I was acting out in school, I’d be kind of the violent angry kid."

Today -- six years later -- Devon says he’s worked through the anger and the pain. And looking back, he says the divorce provided a new beginning for him.

"It’s more positive," he says. "You can be with somebody you love -- I love my mom and she loves me -- I can be with my dad another time -- I love him, he loves me, you know. But when it all comes together, it just doesn’t get along."

Experts say the paradox of divorce is that it’s hard on children, especially young kids, and often leaves them feeling angry and alienated. But it is also a way to end the war between parents.

"It’s like there’s no more fighting, there’s no more fear … it’s a completion," says Intervention Specialist Winny Rush, M.Ed. "And then you can go on to a sense of understanding and acceptance."

Experts say these research results challenge a common assumption: that divorce leaves children emotionally scarred for life.

"They’re resilient and we do learn to adapt, especially children who are given no choice," says Rush.

She adds that how well a child adapts depends in part on the parents. "If the children see their parents healthy and happy after the divorce, I think it’s probably not as bad as they thought it was," says Rush.

For children whose parents are going through a divorce, Devon says it may be painful now, but he adds, "Know that you can deal with it. It’s not the end. It’s just a different path to take."

Tips for Parents
The debate continues as to how divorce affects children, but one thing remains certain – they are affected. Children will typically experience certain feelings and emotions; the magnitude of those feelings largely depends on the child’s relationship with the parents before the divorce, the intensity and duration of any disagreements, and whether or not the parents put the child’s feelings above their own throughout the divorce. The most common emotions children feel are listed below, organized by Kathleen O’Connell Corcoran, of e-Mediation Information and Resource Center.

Denial – This occurs particularly in young children and often surfaces as story-telling. For instance, a child may say, "Mommy and Daddy and me are going to Disneyland," or "We're moving into a duplex and Daddy will live next door." Children in denial will also have reconciliation fantasies.
Abandonment – When parents separate, children worry about who will take care of them. They are afraid that they, too, are "divorceable" and will be abandoned by one or both of their parents. This problem is made worse if parents take the children into their confidence and/or talk negatively about the other parent in front of the children. Parents need to avoid using language such as, "Daddy is divorcing us." Parents should also avoid being late for school or carpool pick-up, or abducting the children, as these actions increase children’s insecurities. Children who are feeling insecure say things that are intended to evoke a "mama bear/papa bear" response (a demonstration of protectiveness). If children do not have "permission" to have a good relationship with the other parent, or if they think they need to "take care of" one of their parents in the divorce, they are likely to have feelings of divided loyalties between their parents. In extreme cases, they may become triangulated with one parent against the other.
Preoccupation with information – Children will want details of what is happening and how it affects them. Communication from the parents needs to be unified and age-appropriate.
Anger and hostility – Children may express anger and hostility with peers, siblings or parents. School performance may be impaired. A child’s hostility is often directed at the parent that he/she perceives is at fault. Hostility turned inward looks like depression in children.
Depression – Symptoms can include lethargy, sleep and eating disturbances, acting out, social withdrawal and/or physical injury (more common in adolescents).
Immaturity/hyper-maturity – Children may regress to an earlier developmental stage when they felt assured of both parents' love. They may "baby-talk" or wet their beds. Or, children may become "parentified" by what they perceive to be the emotional and physical needs of their parents.
Preoccupation with reconciliation – The more conflict there is between the parents, the longer children hold onto the notion of their parents' reconciliation. To the child, conflict shows that the parents are not "getting on" with their lives. Children will often act out in ways that force their parents to interact (negatively or positively). Children whose parents were very confrontational during the marriage often mistake the strong emotions of conflict with intimacy. They see the parents as engaged in an intimate relationship.
Blame and guilt – Because so much marital conflict may be related to the stress of parenting, children often feel responsible for their parents' divorce; they feel that somehow their behavior contributed to it. This is especially true when parents fight during exchanges about the children or in negotiating schedules – children see this as their parents "fighting over them." Children may try to bargain their parents back together by promises of good behavior; they may have difficulty with transitions or refuse to go with the other parent.
Acting out – Children will often act out their own anger and their parents' anger. In an attempt to survive in a hostile environment, children will often take the side of the parent they are presently with. This may manifest in refusals to talk to the other parent on the phone or reluctance to share time with the other parent. Adolescents will typically act out in ways similar to how the parents are acting out.
For parents going through divorce, it is easy to become overwhelmed if your child is exhibiting the behaviors listed above.

According to Dr. Rex Forehand, from the Institute of Behavioral Research at the University of Georgia, "many parents of divorce believe they have done irreversible damage to their children because of the parents’ permanent separation. However, many of the problems children experience following parental divorce are not due merely to the separation from one parent. Recent research indicates that children’s adjustment following parental divorce is dependent, to a large extent, on the situation existing after the divorce."

It is important for parents to keep in mind that it’s not too late – they still can play a huge role in their child’s positive development and attitude. Dr. Forehand suggests the following tips to help minimize the negative effects of divorce:

Both parents should work to maintain a positive relationship with their child. This serves as a buffer against the stresses of divorce, and assures the child of the parents’ continued love.
Parents should subject the child to as few environmental and structural changes as possible (e.g. have the child attend the same school, continue to live in the same home, etc.). It is particularly important to maintain consistency regarding the child’s standard of living. For this reason, regular child support payments are often critical.
Ex-spouses should not argue or fight in the child’s presence. This is perhaps the most important issue related to a child’s adjustment following parental divorce. The amount of parental conflict that the child sees (e.g. regarding visitation, custody, child support, etc.) is directly related to their level of adjustment.
Consistent discipline is very important. Both parents should use similar age-appropriate discipline techniques with their children. Limits on what is and is not acceptable behavior for their children should also be consistent between the two homes.
The child should not be used as a messenger in parental communications. He/she should never be asked to communicate messages such as "tell your dad that he is late with the child support payment."
Likewise, the child should never be used as a spy. Parents should not ask their child questions about the other parent’s life (e.g. questions about whom the parent is dating).
Parents should not use the child as an ally in parental battles, and in fact, should avoid bringing the child into battles. Trying to get the child to take sides usually results in damaging the child’s relationship with both parents.
The parents should never put down the other spouse in front of their child. It is important to remember the ex-spouse is still the child’s parent (no matter how much anger or resentment there is).
The child should not be burdened with the parents’ personal fears and concerns. Unfortunately, many divorced parents turn to their children for support. This almost always has a negative impact on children and adolescents because they are rarely capable of handling such stress. Children have enough difficulty with their own adjustment without the added burden of their parents’ problems.
It is usually in the child’s best interest to have a consistent pattern of frequent visits with the non-custodial parent. Frequent cancellations, long periods of no contact, and sporadic visitation schedules often have a detrimental effect on the child.
References
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
The Mediation Information and Resource Center
The University of Georgia – Institute for Behavioral Research

http://www.winknews.com/news/local/50490087.html

__________________________________________

Attorney freed after 14 years in jail

Was imprisoned for contempt in bitter divorce battle in Pa.

PHILADELPHIA - A Pennsylvania attorney who was released from prison Friday after serving the longest imprisonment on a civil contempt charge in U.S. history said judges have too much discretion in cases like his.

"If I had been convicted of murder in the third degree in Pennsylvania, I would have been out in half the time I was in jail," H. Beatty Chadwick said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press.

A judge ordered Chadwick's release from a county prison in suburban Philadelphia more than 14 years after he was jailed for refusing to turn over millions of dollars in a bitter divorce battle. The case prompted dozens of appeals to county, state and federal courts, twice reaching the U.S. Supreme Court.


Chadwick, 73, said he will stay with his 41-year-old son, Bill, for now. He said he plans to find a job, though he was not sure what sort of work he would do.

"I have to spend a little time thinking about that and seeing how I can best use my skills and talents," Chadwick said, speaking from the office of his lawyer, Michael Malloy. He said he was not sure if he would return to practicing law; he is eligible to apply for his law license when a five-year suspension ends next year.

Judge: Incarceration lost its effect
Chadwick was jailed in April 1995, accused of hiding $2.5 million from his ex-wife during divorce proceedings. Chadwick maintained he lost the money in bad investments. In 2006, before the economic downturn, experts estimated the money would be worth more than $8 million.

After repeated attempts to have himself freed, Chadwick's request was granted by Delaware County Judge Joseph Cronin, who determined his continued incarceration had lost its coercive effect and would not result in him turning over the money.

In court documents ordering the release, Cronin said he agreed with previous court rulings that Chadwick "had the ability to comply with the court order ... but that he had willfully refused to do so."

But Chadwick's continued imprisonment would be legal only if it were likely that he would ultimately comply with the order. The judge said that there was little chance of that, and Chadwick should be released.

Chadwick insisted Friday that he was unable to pay the money and said the law should be written so people in his situation can have a jury decide if they are capable of complying with court orders. He said there also ought to be time limits on jailing people for contempt, adding that there is an 18-month limit in the federal courts for refusing to testify before a grand jury.

"There's no question about whether they're able to do it everybody's able to testify. But in my case, of course, there's a question: Was I able?" he said.

'Thumbed his nose'
Chadwick and the former Barbara Jean "Bobbie" Crowther married in 1977 and lived in Philadelphia's wealthy Main Line suburbs. She filed for divorce in 1992.

Bobbie Chadwick, now known as Bobbie Applegate, declined to comment when reached by telephone at her home in Maine on Friday.

Applegate's attorney, Albert Momjian, said it was the longest incarceration on a civil contempt case in U.S. history. He said he understood and respected the judge's decision but was still disappointed.

"Here's a guy who thumbed his nose at a court order for 14 years," Momjian said of Chadwick. "There should be some kind of sanctions for doing that."

Current Unemployment Rate (and over 75% are men)

And based on prior media and governmental statistical information, men account for over 75% of the unemployed.

Current Unemployment Rate

From an AP article we learn that another 467,000 jobs were cut last month. Whats more is it gives us the current unemployment rate of 9.5% and then gives us a concrete number:

All told, 14.7 million people were unemployed in June.

So what does that mean? It means there are 14.7 million people who are out of a job, but are still looking for a job. This brings up the obvious question... what of those who just give up looking for a job? The simple answer is that they aren't counted. The article continues and gives us the rate that most of us care about:

If laid-off workers who have given up looking for new jobs or have settled for part-time work are included, the unemployment rate would have been 16.5 percent in June, the highest on records dating to 1994.

16.5%?!?! So AP pegs those under or unemployed at 25,457,355. That gives a private sector unemployment rate of 22.27% (private sector being calculated from BLS numbers of all employed in 2008 of 154,287,000 minus approx 40,000,000 public sector employees)

Its good to know that we are in the good hands of a Kenyan after being in the good hands of a "compassionate conservative." Imagine how bad things would be if we had a more libertarian government with a Ron Paul or Chuck Baldwin in office.

Missouri governor signs bill allowing paternity challenges

By CHRIS BLANK

The Associated Press

JEFFERSON CITY Men will have two years to challenge paternity rulings with DNA tests under legislation signed Tuesday by Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon.

If a test proves the man is not the biological father, he would be excused from previous child-support debt and would have criminal nonsupport convictions removed from his record, under the new Missouri law that takes effect Aug. 28.

Petitions challenging paternity would need to be filed by the end of 2011 or within two years of a judgment that the person is the father.

More than 30 states over the past decade have adopted similar laws.

Supporters of the measure contend that a man shouldn’t have to pay child support when he is not the father and should have an opportunity to prove that.

Men are automatically presumed to be a child’s father if they are married to the mother. They also can be named the legal father by signing an acknowledgment when the child is born or by a court order. Courts have declared some men to be the father because they didn’t respond to a woman’s paternity assertion.

The paternity legislation was among nearly two dozen bills signed Tuesday by Nixon.

One of them would ban vaporizers that heat or vibrate alcoholic drinks so that they turns into an inhalable mist. Another would give the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission greater flexibility in awarding contracts for roads and bridges.

Normally, design and construction contracts are awarded separately, but transportation officials contend combining them can save time and money. The transportation agency in 2002 was given permission to use single design-build contracts for three projects, but it has used up that allowance.

Under the new law, the transportation commission will be allowed to award design-build contracts for up to 2 percent of its annual projects until July 2012. The agency currently awards about 500 road projects per year, which means about 10 projects annually would be eligible for a contract that would be awarded to a single design-builder.

The commission also can use a single contract for improvements on Missouri Route 364 in St. Charles and St. Louis counties; the intersection of U.S. Route 169 and 96th Street in Kansas City; and repairs from Missouri Highway 92 to Highway E in Smithville. Those won’t count against the cap.

http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics/story/1311974.html

___________________________________

Parents Face New Penalty For Failing To Pay Child Support

Change Allows Electronic Monitoring, Jail Time

MADISON, Wis. -- A local judge and a sheriff are squaring off over changes to a state statute.

At issue is the penalty parents face when not paying child support. Critics said the recent change may actually eliminate a motivation to pay-up.

"We're real concerned that when word gets out that the consequence for hanging out at home and not paying child support is to go hang out at home with electronic monitoring bracelets on your ankle we just lost our power to coerce the payment of child support from these people," said Dane County Judge Bill Foust.

Until June 30, parents not paying child support were held in contempt and jailed for up to six months.

The change in the state statute now allows sheriff’s to release any inmate on electronic monitoring, the jail’s Custody Alternative Monitoring Program (CAMP), including those who fail to pay child support. Those parents were previously ineligible for electronic monitoring.

It is not in the best interest of children, families for a dead beat dad or a dead beat mom to sit in jail for up to six months and not pay child support," said Dane County Sheriff Dave Mahoney. "My intent if somebody is brought into the jail for failure to pay child support. I will immediately notify the court to try to get this individual in before the family court commissioner for a hearing to work out a process to pay child support."

Judge Foust said Tuesday that allowing parents to be released on house arrest will lead to problems, in part because family court commissioners tell him a quarter of people jailed for not paying child support; end up paying within a week of being behind bars.

Judge Foust sent a letter to Mahoney on Tuesday, urging him not to release those who do not pay child support; stating it's "a very bad idea."

Mahoney had not yet received the letter, but said he disagrees with Foust and believes it is best is to get the inmate in front of a family court commissioner to set up payments.

Currently, there are no parents on house arrest for not paying child support, said Mahoney.

http://www.channel3000.com/news/19987405/detail.html

_______________________________

Father ordered to pay $20,000 punishment

Child-support challenger a nuisance, judge says

KIRK MAKIN

JUSTICE REPORTER — From Monday's Globe and Mail Last updated on Tuesday, Jul. 07, 2009 07:32AM EDT

An Ontario Superior Court judge has ordered a crusading fathers'-rights activist to pay $20,000 to the federal government as punishment for mounting an ill-founded challenge to federal child-support payment guidelines.

Mr. Justice Alan C.R. Whitten ruled that Lucien Khodeir's negligence lawsuit amounted to a delaying tactic designed to forestall him having to pay support orders of $1,230 - including arrears - for Mr. Khodeir's 12- and 14-year-old children.

Several weeks ago, Judge Whitten dismissed the lawsuit after a brief hearing.

"Access to justice does not mean an absence of consequences or responsibilities," he said in the costs ruling. "It is trite to say that no one wishes to discourage meritorious claims, but it would be naive to think that all claims are per se meritorious."

Judge Whitten said that Mr. Khodeir is not a hero, but a public nuisance. He likened Mr. Khodeir to a citizen who phones the fire department to report an emergency: "Having so accessed this service, we should be prepared to face the consequences - costs or otherwise - if we phone in a false alarm or something we can readily extinguish ourselves."

However, Mr. Khodeir said in an interview that the cost ruling is another example of judges shutting the courtroom doors to self-represented litigants who display the audacity to attack a sacred legal shibboleth such as the child-support guidelines.

Mr. Khodeir said that he is in debt "up to my eyeballs," but he will not be deterred from his campaign to overturn guidelines that he regards as unfair, arbitrary and discriminatory toward men.

"I'm not going to give up until I'm either dead or something else stops me from proceeding," Mr. Khodeir said. "They are trying to say that I'm just bitching about my child support, but that is not what I'm doing at all."

Mr. Khodeir - a self-employed Hamilton tax auditor - accused Judge Whitten of making up his mind before ever hearing any arguments in the case.

"Every time I opened my mouth, he would shut me up," Mr. Khodeir said. He added that, out of a total of approximately 50 court appearances he has made, only on one occasion was he treated fairly by a judge.

"I don't expect to win every argument, but I'm fairly intelligent and educated, so I should be able to win one or two arguments along the way," he said. "Generally, judges don't like to hear from self-represented litigants because they consider them a waste of time."

In addition to his failed lawsuit, Mr. Khodeir has been pursuing a separate case in family court that also alleges that the child-support guidelines are an unconstitutional add-on to the Divorce Act.

He claimed that the guidelines were improperly drafted by a group of bureaucrats and family-law experts, and that they fail to take into consideration an individual's ability to pay.

The presiding judge in the family-court motion has reserved his ruling.

In his ruling on the costs award, Judge Whitten conceded that Mr. Khodeir is an intelligent man who is adept at citing past judgments and precedents.

However, Judge Whitten said that he was not impressed by the purported novelty of Mr. Khodeir's submissions, nor by his elaborate attempt to present himself as being "the model of reasonableness."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/father-ordered-to-pay-20000-punishment/article1207517/
_______________________________________