View Single Post
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 10-21-2012, 10:37 AM
Tayken's Avatar
Tayken Tayken is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,569
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future

Originally Posted by Unevenplayingground View Post
We knew that he was being manipulated beyond belief by the mother. Keep in mind, she isn't able to respond to this, so you only have my word on the events.
How did you "know". You are presenting a statement of "fact" then identifying it as a "subjective belief" in the next sentence. You countered your own evidence. I truly hope your affidavit material, testamony and statements to the OCL reporter were not delivered in this pattern.

You may want to look up 'emotional reasoning' on Google. This is a common pattern to "emotional reasoning". You may have some "emotional reason" to support your "belief" but, it may very well not be grounded in a cogent and relevant fact.

Originally Posted by Unevenplayingground View Post
We have had him call his mother when he arrives with us so (so she knows he got here ok) she doesn't answer the phone, then almost a week later calls to yell at him for not calling.
Then you produce the phone records, and send a with prejudice letter attaching the cogent and relevant evidence to the fact you made the phone call. You do this identifying in your own incoming call record that the mother called you and outline the facts of the conversation in detail and ask that the other parent not conduct themselves in this manner in the future.

Through the application of cogent and relevant evidence you:

(a) establish the call happened using third party documentation from the service provider that actually serviced the call.

(b) establish that the other parent called x days after the incident and raised it as an issue and inject the question why it took so long if it is so important.

(c) that the child is safe, happy and shoing no signs of distress.

(d) the other parent called on on date and time for a duration of X minutes to dispute the fact as established in (a).

(e) you request that this conduct no longer happen and for all communications to happen through the immutable and third party managed parenting system known as Our Family Wizard.

You DEMONSTRATE with COGENT AND RELEVANT EVIDENCE that the incident did happen and that the other parent called you weeks afterwards and is trying to create conflict where no conflict should exist.

Originally Posted by Unevenplayingground View Post
There is a lot of manipulation on her part, but after this whole ordeal we are exhausted.
No police, no CAS, and you are exhausted? For some reason the Respondent in the case law already posted had over 10 police incidents called on him and well, he got through trial (17 days of it!)...

Originally Posted by Unevenplayingground View Post
They system failed us (in our opinion only).
Or your lawyer failed to advise you of what should and could be done. As the moving party in the matter you have to meet and exceed the requirements set forth for a mobility case. Those are determined on the child's best interests... Not the parent's best interests. You can find a lot on mobility on this site and all the case law that is leveraged to make a determiniation of where a child should primarily reside.

The fact that your husband is the leaving parent makes it an uphill battle to establish it is in the child's best interests. And for good reason... A child's habitiual residential location should only be moved ON CONSENT or in their BEST INTERESTS.

Not because your husband got a new job, makes more money, married a new person, etc... IT IS ALL ABOUT THE CHILD'S BEST INTERESTS and the determination of the CHILD'S BEST INTERESTS.

Originally Posted by Unevenplayingground View Post
We thought we were prepared, we thought as long as we told the truth when giving our reasons that his son would make the move.
But, did you explain why it would be in the child's best interests? That is the only element of a mobility matter a judge can make a decision on.

Originally Posted by Unevenplayingground View Post
Another thing is, his son always said he wanted to move with us, he was even the one that told his mother that. It took a lot of guts for a kid to say that to a parent, and through this whole experience, he learned he didn't have a voice.
A child may say they want to be a astronaut at that age and then a doctor. Children do have a voice, your husband's child expressed it to the OCL and although the move may be in you and your husband's best interests ... It may very well not have been in the best interest of the child.

If the child's best interests were *THIS* important to you and your husband... You simple would not have moved. Simple fact. You would have made due with your situation (as adults) for the sake of the child in questions "best interests".

Originally Posted by Unevenplayingground View Post
Now in the end, we were told by the OCL/social worker he said he didn't care where he lived. We have never asked him, because we don't want to put him through that.
The child doesn't realize what a move entails. New friends, new area, new sports teams, new school, new, new, new... This all poses a potential risk to the child's "best interests". The worst part being... Loss of the other parent. As the moving parents, you already demonstrated to the court and OCL that you were willing to leave the child. No matter what "reason" you give for you and / or husbands best interests as adults... I again state it is NOT about your best interests... But, the BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD.

Originally Posted by Unevenplayingground View Post
I just feel like being a woman helps, your lawyer, the OCL/social worker you get, the judge you get if you go to trial, it all comes into play.
Gender doesn't matter. What matters is how you demonstrate yourself as a parent. If you are willing to uproot a child to a new area without consideration of the other parent and the child's relationship... Doesn't reflect on you as a parent quite well. Furthermore, it doesn't demonstrate the fundamental understating of what demonstrates a child's best interests.

Originally Posted by Unevenplayingground View Post
We also think the more deceitful you are can really help. We played fair and lost.
You "lost" because you made family law a "win-lose" situation between the parties and failed to focus on the only real important person in the litigation... THE CHILD.... Who's BEST INTERESTS is all the courts can make a determination on.

The only winners and losers in family law are children. Parents are adult and should know better than to move away from their children's habitual residence and should not be going to court thinking they can "win" this.

Originally Posted by Unevenplayingground View Post
No, this isn't everybody's final outcome, but we definately feel the system on a whole failed us, and that as much as we did try, we also were not educated enough, but that was why we hired our lawyer. We knew we had no idea what to do.
Your lawyer's first advice out of their mouth should have been:

You are going to seek a mobility decision before the court for a child. You have to establish based on facts why this is in the child's best interests. I will only represent parents who can prior to application bring cogent and relevant evidence that this move will be in the child's best interests, the only factor for which the court will rule on. Your husbands new salary, new home, and all the new opportunities for you and your husband are of no relevance to the court.

Here is some case law which is the determining factor on mobility matters as determined by the Superior Court of Canada. Please read this documentation prior to attending my office in full, write a small essay on why you think your matter is similar to this case law and bring the appropriate documentation to our next meeting demonstrating this.

Case law to read: CanLII - 1996 CanLII 191 (SCC)

If you lawyer, never gave you a copy of or told you to read that link... You got taken by your lawyer and this whole court battle was about making money for the lawyer and not resolving a problem that could be resolved with the assistance of the court.

Sorry to be so blunt. But, mobility is not something to go in to court with unless you have SOLID cogent and relevant evidence.

Good Luck!

When all is said and done, I am still confused on the process.[/QUOTE]
Reply With Quote