DAD ACCUSED

Dad accused of using belt Jan 01

January 16, 2000
Dad fails to understand
With a wayward teen son, he felt corporal punishment was necessary
By LICIA CORBELLA - Calgary Sun

It is generally recognized most parents will do virtually anything to help their children.

Jim and Julie are no exception. Their lives are dedicated to their three children.

Sadly, the Canadian child-welfare system, the police and the courts don't see it that way. In a last-ditch attempt to stop their 15-year-old son from heading down a path that they know will only lead to desperation, heartache and perhaps even jail, Jim used corporal punishment to try to bring his son in line and faces a criminal record for his efforts.

This past November, their son, Larry (whose name, along with theirs, has been changed to protect his identity) made it increasingly evident he was out of control and did not recognize the authority of his parents.

"He stole our money, broke a door, broke a wall, skipped school, didn't come home on time and smoked inside the house," ex-plains Jim.

In fact, Larry had stolen so much money from his parents, they bought a lock for their bedroom door.

One day, they came home to find the door to their bedroom kicked in and their money stolen once again.

When confronted, their son told them to "f... off."

"We had to do something," explains Jim, wringing his hands.

"He would not listen and we believe our son may be involved in drugs and is headed for very serious trouble if he doesn't change."

At his wife's prompting, Jim grabbed a belt and tried to spank his son. He missed twice, but eventually struck him once on his thigh with his belt.

His son ran off to a friend's house -- a home where one of the children of the home has apparently been in trouble with the law -- and moved in.

Nine days later, a social worker was called and photos of a bruise on Larry's thigh were taken. Jim doesn't believe the bruise could have possibly resulted from what he did -- especially nine days later.

On that same day, however, police came to Jim's humble northeast home and charged him with assault and the use of a weapon (the belt).

Since then, Jim and his wife have spent thousands of dollars in legal fees and been ordered by a court to pay support for their son, who will be placed into a foster home.

"I spanked my son because I love him. I'm not trying to hurt him, I'm trying to help him," says Jim, an immigrant.

"I'm trying to correct his behaviour. What happens to society if you don't correct your children?" he asks.

His frustration and desperation is tangible.

"In my culture, children do not speak to their parents the way my son speaks to us.

"They have more respect.

"I am doing what I believe to be right, what is done in the country I come from, but the government and the courts say I am criminal; I am a bad parent."

Jim's story, while still relatively rare, is sure to become increasingly common if an advocacy group, trying to have the courts strike down a section of the Criminal Code that permits parents to spank their children, has its way.

That the Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law is the same group that vehemently fought for the right of 14-year-olds to be sodomized is not lost on Jim.

"What kind of sick people are these people? They say they care for children? It is unbelievable."

Unfortunately, it is real.

In 1995, the CFCYL intervened in the appeal of the Carmen M. case in Ontario.

A 23-year-old man had been charged with four offences following his three-year sexual relationship with the niece of his fiancee -- which included oral, vaginal and anal intercourse beginning when the girl was 13 and ending a few months after the sicko married the girl's aunt.

The man was found guilty of sexual assault and sexual interference and sentenced to a whopping 18 months.

But he was not found guilty of sodomy.

The judge ruled that the sodomy occurred when the girl was 14 and, while the law did not allow such an act, the law was unconstitutional because it denied the accused the defence of consent.

The ruling was appealed and that's when these folks who claim to love children so much stepped forward.

Rather than be outraged over the details of the case -- like the rest of society -- the CFCYL was outraged at the inequality that existed in the law. Since the age of consent for sexual intercourse is 14 but the age of consent for sodomy was 18, the CFCYL came to the rescue of our children, making it legal for 14-year-olds to "consent" to buggery, even if it's with a much older stranger.

The organization -- which receives taxpayer money to fight these battles -- argued the law discriminated against gays. They won.

Jim, on the other hand, fears for his chances in court, in a world that would rather allow a child to be sodomized by a stranger seeking nothing more than sexual gratification, than a child be spanked by a loving parent seeking what's best for their child.

"My wife cries every day. Our family is ruined. Our son is in danger and even though they took my son away from us against our wishes, they want us to pay for his support," says Jim, shaking his head.

"I'm very confused."

Who isn't?