Hey Dundonald Park advocates, throw us a bone!

Trash can at the corner of McLaren & Bay St. Photo Credit: Jim Davies

I recently read Dorian Panchyson's article in the Centretown Buzz about a community effort to revitalize Dundonald Park. I think the first place to start is to change the way dogs and, de facto,  dog owners, are treated in the park. Dog owners, as well as tai chi practitioners, people enjoying a sunny day on a park bench, homeless people, bocci players, chess players and daily commuters use this park on a regular basis.  Dundonald Park is an oasis of neighbourly-ness in the urban core that has few greenspaces. Since becoming a dog owner in 2008, I consistently look forward to walking my dog, Mrs. Wiggles, to meet up with fellow dog walkers and passers-by; many of whom have become friends of mine.

Mrs. Wiggles in February 2011. Photo Credit: Sean Toomey. Throw the dog a bone and give  her a place to walk or run freely. And maybe another little boot.

However, the tone established in the park is one of prohibition. I think it's in the same spirit as the Safe Streets Act, which attempts to overregulate public space for the elusive goal of "protecting the public".

Observe and Report! The world is clearly going to the dogs! Photo credit: Vanessa Davies; courtesy of  ottawa.ca

At each corner of the park, there is a trashcan marked "Do not deposit dog waste here." I appreciate the City of Ottawa's effort to clean up the park, but I think the plan is aimed at the wrong end, so to speak. I think the internal logic is that if people are prohibited from disposing their trash, they won't bring their dogs here. The evidence (twice daily walks to the park 10 months of the year) dictates the plan is a failure, because lots of people walk their dog and pick up after it. Frankly, I think the prohibition on depositing dog waste aims to punish the few owners who neglect to pick up after their pet, but in fact punishes us all unfairly and makes us feel unwelcome in our local park. It also raises the question, "if not in the only 4 trash receptacles in the park, where else do I deposit the waste of the loyal animal for whom I care and who I consider part of my family?" I ignore the ban and simply put the trash in the receptacle because to leave it on the ground would be illegal and unethical; to carry it several blocks would be unreasonably onerous. There need to be more trashcans downtown anyways, so discouraging people to use the ones that are there turns the City's aim of "cleaning the capital" on its head.

So, please, throw us a bone by taking down the prohibition signs on the trashcans, installing more trash cans - if they're not being installed because they're unsightly, then get a sculptor like Theo Pelmus to design them and make them into functional public art - before we pave paradise and put up another parking lot.

Summarizing history

On February 10th, I volunteered to report on history as it unfolded in an Ontario Superior Court of Justice courtroom on a freezing cold Ottawa afternoon.

The Canadian Centre for International Justice (CCIJ) canvassed the University listserv for volunteers to follow and report on the Mungwarere Trial. Jacques Mungwarere was charged with committing genocide during the Rwandan Genocide. He was located near Windsor, ON, in 2009. Following the prosecution of Desire Munyaneza, he is the second person to be prosecuted in Canada under the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act (Department of Justice).

The first week was an intense week of procedural motions and on Monday, February 11th, the Crown was scheduled to move for an indictment. It was an exciting opportunity to witness the practice of international law firsthand and to apply (and learn the French equivalents of) some of the legal terms I learned over the last few months. Students listened to the proceedings in pairs and then prepared a summary. It was a great learning and mentoring opportunity that also enabled me to contribute to the CCIJ's important work.

Why Chinese Mothers are Superior WSJ 8 Jan 2011

Amy Chua's article, (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704111504576059713528698754.html),  has sparked a debate in the Wall Street Journal, as well as in parenting and psychology literature. There is an articulate rebuttal by a Jewish mother http://abcnews.go.com/Health/jewish-author-responds-wsj-chinese-mothering-controversy/story?id=12623592. Parents have a hard job and as this psychologist suggests, : http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/what-the-wild-things-are/201101/chinese-parent-western-parent-superior-parent-have-we-figured-i, a balance between disciplinarians and laissez-faire is necessary for optimal results

As someone who was raised with "Asian values" along what I will call a cultural faultline (Caucasian-caribbean-indian) and lived to tell the tale, the story she tells is pretty accurate (minus the 3 hours of piano a night), but one-sided. The problem with her model is that it is traumatic for children to live with the culture-bashing, allegations of assimilation and berating between parents and parents and children. Is it worth it to yell til you're hoarse just to demonstrate to the world that you can mimic antiquated hallmarks of elitism? I don't think so. And when does telling your daughter "stop eating so much fatty" stop exactly? From my experience it doesn't because those horrible things live on long after they're said and because parents have diffculty distinguishing their grown 22 year old daughter from the 7 year old in their mind, they feel like they can 1. always say those things and 2. get away without consequences from saying those things because of parental immunity. Kids in this environment grow up accepting and not questioning until they are pushed to their limit; living in perpetual fear, irrationally seeking control, and self-flagellating with blame and guilt. This manifests itself in eating disorders, higher suicide rates between the ages of 15-24 (as the rebuttal cites), obsessions with materialism, and an inability to adapt and deal with the chaos  intrinsic to human life. By understanding the cultural differences and deconstructing them, I have overcome this behaviour and have banished the shame and silence it requires to be effective. There are constructive ways to raise children to be determined, thoughtful, self-sufficient confident members of society, and this isn't it. What's more is all that yelling is in vain: the parenting research illustrates that parenting has very little to do with how your child turns out; personality and friends determine that, and forbidding friends, striking down sense of self-worth have the reverse effect (ie. kids go running to the wrong types of people who give them what they can't get at home). Secondly, in order to curb adolescent rebellion and inspire self-sufficiency, we need to give children a meaningful stake in contributing to society.

Also striking to me is her willing stereotypical bifurcation of cultures, although she tries to smooth it out by combining Asian values with Indian, Caribbean and irish values. But these mothers exist in all races, in all cultures in all eras and I think she sets up a straw man argument that is easily dismantled with ethnography and longitudinal surveys.

Finally, I think parents should be aware of the assault scheme in Canadian criminal law if they are going to use some of the tactics advocated by Ms. Chua. Section 265 of the Criminal Code states:

265. (1) A person commits an assault when

(a) without the consent of another person, he applies force intentionally to that other person, directly or indirectly;

(b) he attempts or threatens, by an act or a gesture, to apply force to another person, if he has, or causes that other person to believe on reasonable grounds that he has, present ability to effect his purpose; or

(c) while openly wearing or carrying a weapon or an imitation thereof, he accosts or impedes another person or begs.

Application

(2) This section applies to all forms of assault, including sexual assault, sexual assault with a weapon, threats to a third party or causing bodily harm and aggravated sexual assault.

Consent

(3) For the purposes of this section, no consent is obtained where the complainant submits or does not resist by reason of

(a) the application of force to the complainant or to a person other than the complainant;

(b) threats or fear of the application of force to the complainant or to a person other than the complainant;

(c) fraud; or

(d) the exercise of authority.

Accused's belief as to consent

(4) Where an accused alleges that he believed that the complainant consented to the conduct that is the subject-matter of the charge, a judge, if satisfied that there is sufficient evidence and that, if believed by the jury, the evidence would constitute a defence, shall instruct the jury, when reviewing all the evidence relating to the determination of the honesty of the accused's belief, to consider the presence or absence of reasonable grounds for that belief.

Appealing to parental authority is not a defence, as evidenced by subsection 3(d). Furthermore, parents should also keep the principles outlined by the Supreme Court in Canadian Foundation for Children, youth and The Law v. Canada in mind when punishing children. Punishment or parental strongarming must be corrective but reasonable and not be "outbursts of violence motivated by anger or animated by frustration" and must be the "education or discipline of the child". The child must be able to benefit from the application of force; if incapable of doing so, the application of force is void. Any force, verbal or physical, must be reasonable. Parents can also be sued for battery and negligence for tortious conduct in childrearing. Parents should and must be accountable for the choices they make in raising their children and I disagree with the parental immunity Chau implies and supports.  The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 37 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child  "requires state parties to ensure that '[n]o chld shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." These are important limits and guidelines for parents to remember as they impose their own limits and guidelines on their children.

Bilingualism of Supreme Court Justices

The debate about possible limits of Canada's bilingualism laws has re-emerged in the debate over its Supreme Court justices. Lysianne Gagnon published an article in the Globe and Mail about the potential problems with the proposed legislation that would compel SCC judges to be bilingual, or limit appointments to bilingual candidates.

The SCC judges are currently appointed and hold the post until the age of 75.

Law School

On Monday, April 19, I was offered admission to the University of Ottawa Faculty of Law's English Common Law Program, to commence studies in Fall 2010.

This is a prestigious programme with incredible opportunities to grow, including the opportunity to pursue a joint Juris Doctorate program in the United States.

I am extremely excited about embarking on this new phase in my career.