Merged Child Custody in CF thread (joint custody, etc.)

[FJAG]

Alberta Bound

I take your point but there are some fundamental issues in what you are saying.

Firstly, the issue is not so much the court as the residential move. When parents move farther apart then what was contemplated in the initial order, the physical separation causes a fundamental change in the way that custody and access functions. Distance is what causes the problem. Quite frequently the order will have to change simply because the old order is no longer practical.

Secondly, ex parte hearings are an unusual proceeding which the courts only resort to in the event of an emergency situation. In every case where an ex parte order is made it is only temporary and there is a requirement to have another hearing where all parties are allowed to participate and have their say. It may be difficult for a party in Ontario to participate in a hearing in BC, but the opportunity will be there. Courts will never deny a parent the right to participate in the final hearing. One caution here. The longer that an ex parte order remains in place before the final hearing, the more likely it is that the terms of the ex parte order will become a new status quo making it more difficult to vary the terms in the final order.

Lastly, family law cases, and especially custody issues, are some of the most difficult that courts face. Frequently, the emotions involved are very high and there are many "horror stories" that are told by the "losing" parent that greatly exaggerate the real reason behind why the order was worded the way it was. One thing to remember as well is that the wording in most court orders is pretty standard. In Manitoba (where I practised) there has been a project in place since 1998 called the "Automated Family Court Order Project" which mandates the wording to be used in a family court order. Here is the standard peace officer's clause:

"All sheriffs, deputy sheriffs, constables and other peace officers within
Manitoba shall do all such acts as may be necessary to enforce
paragraph(s) {specify paragraph number(s) for no contact or
communication, prohibition and other clauses to be enforced} of this
Order. For such purposes they, and each of them, are given full power
and authority to enter upon any lands and premises whatsoever to
enforce those terms;"

You'll have to agree that this is a much better clause than the one you cite. It's not a request; it specifically identifies which parts of the order it relates to; and it immediately gives them powers to act.

My issue with some of what you say is that we can always find an example of something (whether factual or just an anecdote) that makes the courts look bad. The real fact is that courts do not work arbitrarily; they have rules and procedures that are designed to provide as fair a hearing and outcome for everyone as possible.

I used to have a saying which is that "when it comes to contested litigation, less than half the clients will be satisfied".  The clients that "lost" will be unhappy because they lost. The parties that "won" will be unhappy because, in their eyes, the outcome was a "slam dunk from day one" and they're pissed because it took so long and was so expensive to get there.

One thing we both agree with is that it's no place for amateurs. If you are the non-custodial parent in one of these situations, get a lawyer who practices extensively in the field of family law and get him/her involved right away. Time is not your friend.

:cheers:

 

[opcougar]

Interesting thread this one, and a lot of the advice given here is worth its weight in gold to you OP! I am not a Lawyer at all, specifically when it comes to family law. Note: Not all Lawyers are skilled in the area of family law, so don't just listen to any Lawyer!!!

However, what I do have going for me, is first hand knowledge and experience of the family law wranglings. It was me who ended my marriage, and there was a toddler son cut in between all this. Mediation was initiated by me, but ex wanted everything her way, as opposed to being realistic as to what she is entitled to. I initially started the paper work mysef i.e. I downloaded the forms, filled them in and served her on my bday (So I won't forget). It was only then she realized that I wasn't kidding and don't like playing games.

She had 30days to respond, and got herself a lawyer who responded to me on day 29 agreeing to most of the things I asked for all along which included primarily 50-50 of our child, which she didn't want before, and instead wanted me to be EOW (every other weekend). She came back with a counter of Spousal support (9 yr marriage), CS (which I was going to pay an offset amount of anyway), half of my small pension, and child support for her teenage daughter from before (which she is already getting money for). I refused to pay the latter because I wasn't called dad, never went to school stuff and she wasn't on my MPRR.

Anyway, I hired a lawyer up until the case conference stage costing a small fortune for retainer and documentation, before I left the lawyer go and started doing my own work i.e self representing. If you are the type that liek to read / research and can document in a chronological order, it is possible. I also went on the site called CANLII to read up on case precedent in Canada and spefically Ontario and used those that related to me, to make my case in every documentation I responded to / served as the applicant.

Long story short...nobody wins during the divorce except the scummy lawyers. The outcome of my case was that I got my primary request (our son) 50-50, got to keep my pension as she was hiding her and Judge got upset over that. Note we never made it to trial, but were scheduled to start on teh day the final order was made by mutual agreement to other items on the list like sale of the house, parenting schedule, no payment of CS that isn't my kid, her dropping spousal support claim, me taking on some debt, consent to divorce, etc. What was suppose to be a 2 day trial never happened, and instead got resolved in 5hrs via an in-house duty counsel.

I am now farmiliar with family law to the point that am able to better advice people who are oblivious to the who system i.e. serving papers, going in front of a judge, decorum, language, appearance, how to answer, and realizing which battles to fight and which ones are irrelevant.

OP...you have to ask yourself, and I recently told a subordinate this...are you really in a state of looking after a kid(s), and still going through training and doing your day job? If the answer is NO, then it's a no-brainer that the kids best interest should take precedence i.e. what is best for them in a stable way, until you are able to be 100% available to them. Do not look at it from a Child support perspective, you are going to pay it regardless if you are the highest earner. Being a single parent holding down a full-time job and paying offset child support is no fun. A typical week involves skating, scouts, gymnastic, karate and of course school and homework.

It's because of this that most men and some women bail, letting the other parent take care of all this because of the work involved for 1 kid. Imagine if it's 2, 3 or more. So again, be true with yourself and think it through before you waste money on lawyers, money that could have been spent on yourself and the kid(s). You can always go back to court at a later date to ask for increase in the access / parenting time e.g 2 overnights during the week in addition to your every other weekend as a starter.

The rule is simple, anything under 40% access time means you have to pay full table amount child support. This is one reason why some vindictive women like having sole custody i.e. more money for them and being able to claim the kids as dependents come tax time. Just in case you haven't see it, here is the ONTARIO child support table amount

http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/fl-df/child-enfant/fcsg-lfpae/2006/tbl1_4/on_b.pdf

Alberta

http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/fl-df/child-enfant/fcsg-lfpae/2006/tbl1_4/alta_b.pdf

Clearly a lot of people are oblivious to this like I was, but am glad I only have 1 kid as opposed to 2 or more with the money am paying someone else every month. Looking forward to when kid is old enough to know and payment can stop funding another person's personal shopping.

If you don't show up to your court dates, it's only a matter of time before you piss a Judge off, and they can easily grant to the other party what they are requesting in their response / claim. This actually happens more than you think, then there is cost which you could be on the hook for.

In most cases, the person that "lost" is dinged with costs at the end when a Judge orders parties to within certain days send in their substantiation. This is why people always ask for cost, in order not to be left with a huge legal bill.

As you can probably tell by now, I am passionate about this subject matter, and always willing to help out. I dispise people using kids as pawn for their own selfish agenda, and feeling entitled to stuff "just because". First order for me was getting myself nipped, and yes am adamant that no more marriage for me or anyone that earns less than 80% of what I do. You might think it's ridiculous, but think about how family works, and you will see the bias in place and the game of tag that takes place as it relates to spousal support etc. Who wants to be paying child support and indefinite alimony, even when your ex is shacking up with someone else and living better than you do??????

I can't for the life of me understanding why some guys do it twice, thrice etc. Lesson learned folks, fool me once and all that. I am loving just companisonship(s) as it is now, and getting laid more than when I was married. LOL

Good luck and give all this a thought before making any irrational decision.

Alberta Bound

I take your point but there are some fundamental issues in what you are saying.

Firstly, the issue is not so much the court as the residential move. When parents move farther apart then what was contemplated in the initial order, the physical separation causes a fundamental change in the way that custody and access functions. Distance is what causes the problem. Quite frequently the order will have to change simply because the old order is no longer practical.

Secondly, ex parte hearings are an unusual proceeding which the courts only resort to in the event of an emergency situation. In every case where an ex parte order is made it is only temporary and there is a requirement to have another hearing where all parties are allowed to participate and have their say. It may be difficult for a party in Ontario to participate in a hearing in BC, but the opportunity will be there. Courts will never deny a parent the right to participate in the final hearing. One caution here. The longer that an ex parte order remains in place before the final hearing, the more likely it is that the terms of the ex parte order will become a new status quo making it more difficult to vary the terms in the final order.

Lastly, family law cases, and especially custody issues, are some of the most difficult that courts face. Frequently, the emotions involved are very high and there are many "horror stories" that are told by the "losing" parent that greatly exaggerate the real reason behind why the order was worded the way it was. One thing to remember as well is that the wording in most court orders is pretty standard. In Manitoba (where I practised) there has been a project in place since 1998 called the "Automated Family Court Order Project" which mandates the wording to be used in a family court order. Here is the standard peace officer's clause:

"All sheriffs, deputy sheriffs, constables and other peace officers within
Manitoba shall do all such acts as may be necessary to enforce
paragraph(s) {specify paragraph number(s) for no contact or
communication, prohibition and other clauses to be enforced} of this
Order. For such purposes they, and each of them, are given full power
and authority to enter upon any lands and premises whatsoever to
enforce those terms;"

You'll have to agree that this is a much better clause than the one you cite. It's not a request; it specifically identifies which parts of the order it relates to; and it immediately gives them powers to act.

My issue with some of what you say is that we can always find an example of something (whether factual or just an anecdote) that makes the courts look bad. The real fact is that courts do not work arbitrarily; they have rules and procedures that are designed to provide as fair a hearing and outcome for everyone as possible.

I used to have a saying which is that "when it comes to contested litigation, less than half the clients will be satisfied".  The clients that "lost" will be unhappy because they lost. The parties that "won" will be unhappy because, in their eyes, the outcome was a "slam dunk from day one" and they're pissed because it took so long and was so expensive to get there.

One thing we both agree with is that it's no place for amateurs. If you are the non-custodial parent in one of these situations, get a lawyer who practices extensively in the field of family law and get him/her involved right away. Time is not your friend.
:cheers: