03-29-95


                 Dad denied custody of kids

Toronto(CP) -- A man whose children were taken away from him 
because he didn't cry enough when his wife died and didn't break 
the news "properly" to his children, has had his custody fight 
adjourned because of legal technicalities.

    The man has been trying to regain custody of his two 
children, whom he he hasn't seen in more than a year, after a 
family court judge ruled he appeared not to be coping with his 
wife's death and was not strong enough to parent his children.

    The Children's Aid Society agrees the children, now aged 
eight and eleven, show no signs of emotional or physical abuse.

    And the judge who awarded 6 month care to the Children's Aid 
Society, says the only evidence against the 46 year-old man, 
whom the law says can't be identified, didn't tell his children 
their mother committed suicide in October 1993.

    The transcript, however, shows he did. His lawyer, Stan 
Ehrlich, urged Judge "Gertrude Speigel" on Monday to overturn 
the original judgement.

    But procedural problems and Speigel's assertion that Ehrlich 
"bungled"  the prepartion of the appeal forced an adjournment 
after two hours of legal  wrangling. No new date has been set.

    The nightmanre began with a tragic error that led to his 
wife's suicide  and was compounded by the subsequent handling of 
the case.

    "I still don't know where my wife's body is", said the man.

     The Children's Aid Society wants the current custody order 
extended past April 20. Last spring the Society ordered the man 
to undergo a psychiatric evaluation but he refused saying that 
it had no cause to ask for one.

                              ===============

Questions...

Would this fiasco have occured if the surviving parent had been 
a woman?

How does a court determine if a man cries enough? Olympic style, 
with a scoring based on volume of tears and artistic merit? Or 
do they have a tear-alyser...?

Why is it that a person dealing with the virtually unlimited 
powers of the Childrens Aid Society and their pet court, Family 
Court, have to prove that they are a fit parent.. should it not 
be that the CAS has to prove its case? Why is there no 
presumption of innocence?


lazarusl@vaxxine.com