From: "Laframboise, Donna" <DLaframboise@nationalpost.com>
To: "'ferrel.christensen@ualberta.ca'" <ferrel.christensen@ualberta.ca>
Subject: ECMAS
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 13:25:22 -0500 [Back]
Thank you for your note. During the past few days I have conducted extensive phone interviews with [Tim] Adams, Bob Bouvier, Brian St. Germaine and Carolyn VanEe. I have also corresponded by e-mail with Mr. Bouvier and been the recipient of e-mail from others. It would be inaccurate, therefore, to suggest that I have not made good faith attempts to "hear the other side of the story."
In the interests of continuing that pursuit, I would be grateful if you
would answer the following questions.
1) How long have you been involved with ECMAS Edmonton?
2) Have you ever held any official positions with ECMAS Edmonton? If so, during which years?
3) Have you ever represented yourself as a spokesperson for ECMAS Edmonton in any dealings with any media, government, court or social service official?
4) Do you, in fact, believe - as you suggest on p. 113 of your book,
PORNOGRAPHY: THE OTHER SIDE - that the real problem with children being
coerced into sex by adults is not the coercion, the childhood sex, or the unequal power relationship, but the fact that children would feel distressed because we live in a society that is uptight about sex?
5) Do you, in fact, believe - as you also suggest on p. 113 - that
pedophiles coercing children into sex "is potentially no more [serious] than [society's] practice of coercing them NOT to act sexually"?
5) Do you think it is inappropriate for a person such as yourself, who holds controversial views about child sex, to be associating with a group seeking to help non-custodial parents, many of whom face false allegations of child sex abuse?
6) Have you ever considered the possibility that your association might be tainting ECMAS and thereby harming the people who turn to it for help?
7) How long have you known [Tim] Adams?
8) Have you read the full text of the Alberta Court of Appeal decision
upholding his disbarment? If so, when?
9) Do you think it is appropriate for a person who has
pleaded guilty to hiring a child prostitute to be the Vice-President of a group
such as ECMAS, in view of the fact that this group seeks to help non-custodial
parents, many of whom face false allegations of child sex abuse? Do you think
this reflects badly on the family rights movement in
10) Have you ever urged anyone associated with ECMAS Edmonton to fire
their/their son's/their grandson's/their nephew's/their spouse's lawyer and hire [Tim] Admas instead? If so, on how many occasions and for what reason?
11) In light of the fact that ECMAS Calgary does not permit members to enter into financial transactions with each other with respect to
assistance/counselling on divorce-related matters, do you think it is
appropriate that a significant percentage of [Tim] Adams' paralegal work
comes from people he meets
through ECMAS? Do you think this reflects badly on the
family rights movement in
12) Do you, as a general principle, believe it is appropriate to vilify
whistleblowers instead of addressing the problems they bring to light?
13) If Ms. Malenfant is motivated by revenge, malice, anger, vindictiveness and a lust for power as some people have alleged, why do you suppose she brought her concerns to me - a journalist known for my sympathy to the family rights movement - rather than to any of a long list of hardline feminist, anti-father journalists out there?
I look forward to your responses.
D.
>Ms. Laframboise:
>
> You have no idea of the harm you are about to do.
>
> [Tim] Adams had no real interest in being vice president of ECMAS; he made
> the decision suddenly, at the AGM, in an attempt to thwart a bid for power
> by Louise. (There was really no danger, but he didn't know the full story
> at the time.) Having alienated nearly all of the regular ECMAS activists,
> she took a few non-regulars and a couple of never-were-members and a
couple
> of alienated members with her hoping to grab some power. In large part,
> what she is doing now is revenge over her rejection by the main body of
> activists here.
>
> You don't know Louise. From a distance, one only sees her good work, not
> her dark side; I learned that the hard way when I dug into my old-age
> savings to bring her here last fall.
>
> If you care anything about journalistic integrity, if you care anything
> about whether the movement
in
> until you hear the other side of the story.
>
> FC
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Donna Laframboise
The National Post
M3B 3R5
phone: 416-383-2374
fax: 416-383-2439
dlaframboise@nationalpost.com