Should the state grant fathers any role, and if so how much of a role, in raising their children? This question has to be front and centre in our thoughts as Canada looks at a man's role in parenting children.

The Vancouver Sun reports that Justice Minster Rob Nicholson said, "The interests of children must take priority over a father's right to an equal parenting role after divorce." This statement was made amid the cheers of a crowd of Canadian Bar Association lawyers, in Dublin according to Canwest News, perhaps hinting that Nicholson is watering down his support for MP Vellacott's Bill. Will this be yet another Conservative MP's private member's bill which gets killed by his own party?

This family issue became important after Mr. Vellacott introduced a private member's bill which would instruct judges to "apply the principle of equal shared parenting unless it is established that the best interests of the child would be substantially enhanced by allocating parental responsibility other than equally."

It is an established fact that the outcome for children is better when both parents are involved in their child's upbringing. So what does the state have to gain in deciding the maternal role is the most important role, to the exclusion of the father should a marriage breakup?

Let's look at the history of increasing government usurpation of the family unit. The government decided that marriage vows "as long as you both shall live" really didn't mean "as long as you both shall live". They introduced no fault divorce, implying that it was a "victimless divorce". Then, when the realisation hit that children were victims, the government again entered into the family relationship to decide how to decrease the devastating impact of their policy on children.

However, now the implication of Mr. Nicholson's comment is that a father is irrelevant and negatively affects the wellbeing of the child. Thus the state should intervene again in the family and remove the father from his role as dad.

What's next in the continuing government saga? Perhaps the next decision will be that a mother is irrelevant and the state should take over her role also. Or, did that already happen with pressure to place children in government funded and controlled daycare while the mother works?

It's time the tide of government usurpation of the parental roles turned. CHP Canada supports both dad and mum in the raising of a child. Together, parents create a child and together they have a responsibility to place the wellbeing of the child first. A government cannot do, as a bureaucracy, what a parent will do for love.

CHP Canada would enact the necessary legislation to secure the future of Canada's children; to protect a child's right to a secure childhood; and to protect a child's right to be raised by both parents.Most MPs will say they have the freedom to say and vote how they please; they almost have to! But, like the home repairs example, if those MPs don't spend their vote they way they're told, they won't get the subsidy, or rather the cabinet positions.

Don't short change our children! CHP Canada has better solutions for the Canadian family; better solutions for Canadian children.

Join your voice with ours and give security to the next generation.