Today, I noticed a blurb on a social services Facebook Page touting the fact that it was Child Abuse Awareness Month. Included on the page was a link identifying four steps to reporting child abuse.

All well and good. One abused child, woman or man is too much. I totally get it.

I asked on the agency's Facebook Page what happens when someone manipulates the system by making false complaints of abuse to the social service agency (as was the case during my divorce with my high conflict ex-wife). I also noted a recent statistic that 55% of claims of abuse turn out to be false. I asked my question tactfully and for information purposes.

The coordinator of the Facebook site suggested I contact them privately for an answer. When I suggested that this was an important community issue and that it was a public interest to demonstrate protocol, they took my question completely off of their site.

Sometimes, you need to push buttons...because there is something wrong with a system that enables high conflict people to act or say what ever they want about another person without appeal.

Two months after my separation - and after my high profile wife's affair - I all of a sudden became an "abusive father". The social services agency knew what was going on - but it did not matter. Context doesn't matter. The behaviour of the person making the complaint doesn't matter. If someone says "boo", apparently the social service agency in my province has a duty to report.

Hi Healing,

The feminist propaganda has had an effect on the sheeple's way of thought. As long as you exert sufficient pressure, the herd will start to change course to where you want it to go.

At the core is most people's instinct to follow the herd, instead of questioning why it's heading for a cliff.


No one likes to see their own mistakes. Public organizations the least of all.


Because that takes courage...



Jack

Well said, Jack. Very well said. This morning I noticed that the social service agency blocked my ability to comment altogether. Pretty disgusting if you think about it. No transparency. No opportunity for dialogue. The things they promote on their Facebook page are essentially two things:

-upcoming programs designed to make money off of the most vulnerable - mostly women and children
-"good news" stories about how the agency is helping people in the community

Of course, what they don't want people to find out about is how one of their counsellors sided with my manipulative and unstable ex while I was going through my divorce, only for the counsellor to make charges to child protective services against me based on what my ex was telling her.

They don't mention that story.

I am recently remarried and she is appalled by this agency's lack of regard for men. Later tonight, my wife is going to post the same question I asked (tactfully). I think the public deserves to know what there rights are when false allegations of abuse are made.

It is time that someone starts to point out the sexist and discriminatory nature of these organizations.

Do they still belong in our society if they actively participate in gender discrimination?




Jack

It's funny you mention that, Jack. Over the last year, I have filed a complaint to an external oversight body here in Ontario against the social worker who supported my high conflict ex-wife during our separation/divorce and who (in tandem) ultimately filed a complaint with Child Protective Services against me. This - even after I offered to meet with my ex and the social worker separately to hash out how we were going to make things work for the kids. But they would have none of that. That's when the lies and maliciousness started.

A few months before child protection services claims were made against me, I met with my ex and social worker to discuss a short-term arrangement for my children. Out of nowhere, the social worker began to criticize me for not doing enough for my ex-wife and her career (forget the fact that I moved countries and homes twice to support her while taking care of three young children). It was completely unprofessional - she didn't even know about my wife's infidelity. Three months later, as my ex took this social worker under her wing, they went to child protective services after my ex threatened that I sign something "or else".

Disgusting. Toxic. Discriminatory.

In my follow-up letter to the advisory body and in response to the social worker's first letter in which she spews lie after lie from her own lawyer (yes, the social worker needs protection from a lawyer) I note this gender discrimination over and over again.

As I stated, "Imagine being asked to characterize your relationship with your recently separated ex-spouse right in front of him/her. Now imagine having to describe the emotional abuse you endured with the ex-spouse while he/she is sitting right next to you. Then imagine that your ex-spouse had cheated on you but you were afraid of the repercussions that would follow had you divulged such information to the person asking such questions. This was the position that _______ put me in. It’s comparable to asking a man/woman with signs of physical violence why their marriage didn’t work, while their “high profile” spouse or ex-spouse is sitting right next to him/her. How intimidating. What’s more, imagine the interrogator telling the person with signs of physical violence that they were actually the cause of the failed marriage. Unimaginable. Callous. Cruel."

I later concluded, "That is why I have decided to take my story public. I am going to tell how agencies and institutions coddled my co-parent while she was verbally harassing and abusing me. I will speak about the so-called experts in the field who went out of their way to enable my ex's abusive behaviour because she was a woman, their friend or high profile person in the community. ________is not alone in being accountable for her actions. I will speak about professionals who empower high conflict individuals because of who they are, not how they behave. And I will speak to the damage professionals like ________did to my kids, all while invoking the need to “reduce the conflict for the sake of the children”.

"In the end, ______ and members of her agency will come to understand that it is not children and women who are abused, but men, too. A U.S Department of Justice study recently indicated that 15% of reported domestic violence incidents occurred against men – or nearly 150,000 cases per year. Most professionals and statisticians believe this number is low as men are prone to underreport domestic violence incidents. Many consider it embarrassing. Some are too scared to act. Others don’t know where to go for help."

"I can see why. For it is troubling that agencies like ______________, and professionals like _________, discriminate against men. The agency makes excuses that they are not properly funded to support the needs of men. But based on my experience, abuse is abuse. And one abuse victim is too much – whether that individual be a man, woman or child."

That is my fight here with this social agency and this particular social worker. I note one other thing: when I originally made a complaint against this social worker to the agency, itself, you will not be surprised that they did nothing at all. I took my complaint up to pretty much the top of the ladder, met with several of their senior staff (including the social worker herself) and they did nothing. No accountability. No surprise.

Great job, my friend.

You're putting it out there as it is, not as everyone wants to hear it. And you're going up the hierarchy if you're not heard at the lower levels.

As I said, it takes courage to see your mistakes. It's no wonder that the top cowards away when pointed at mis-situations: they're responsible for how things go, and they're too afraid to take any blame (job security anyone?). That, or there are darker secrets behind the scenes, that risk being revealed; feminist radicalism is on the rise, and it has a tendency to sneak into unexpected areas.

Besides this, the argument that there are insufficient funds for male support, is basically an excuse to hide the gender discrimination at the core of these organizations. It comes down to "we are not supporting men because we consciously chose to put all our money in supporting women". How much more discriminatory can it get?

Logic would dictate that if there's not enough funds, then support one woman less and one man more. At least then you start trying to avoid discrimination.

The only way to move things in such situations is a public campaign : the top only reacts when their public image is at stake, because that is where they will start losing public support. And when the public is unhappy about an organization, its leadership will be the first one to be booted.

Maybe you could start looking for fellow men who have been viced by this organization too. It's all about the numbers in these situations, and together you have more effect than a single voice in the dark.

Someone up there can easily reject a single man's complaint, but when he is barraged by similar complaints from a lot of people, it will be difficult to ignore.

Along the way, document every step and event of your journey, you might need it to prove your point in the future.

Keep us posted here, we all want to know how it turns out.

Jack

Well said - as always - Jack. I will keep you posted.