View Single Post
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 01-04-2016, 08:23 PM
LovingFather32's Avatar
LovingFather32 LovingFather32 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,518
LovingFather32 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

An Access CTR is the first route scheming parents take.

I refused one also. The judge laughed at an access CTR .. totally inappropriate for most cases.

1. What are her allegations against you for such a request (supervised?)
2. What is her proof of her allegations?

I've learned that if an ex wants supervised....they dont have to prove why unfortunately. Mine didn't. Judges have to take the road of "caution"...schemers take advantage of this. Gross huh?

Heart Surgery? Offer to help out by being there for the twins.

Supervision? Draw up a "Graduated schedule" with her Aunt and Uncle. Do you have a good relationship with them? (sounds like you do).

Collect denials on your graduated supervised visits. i.e - 3-4 weeks then unsupervised for 3 weeks...then overnights, etc.

Keep in mind.....your ex NEEDS to PROVE why you need supervised. Have you beat her up? Are you a pedophile? etc. Do you abuse children? Do you have any police records of substance abuse or domestic violence?

It'a all about your "Ability to act as a parent"...CLRA ; RULE 24 (3) ; 24 (4) of the CLRA...look it up. She has to prove that you cannot act as a parent (easier said than done...especially with no proof (documented evidence).

Did you make it known that you were NOT okay with her taking the twins? That the only way she'd let you see them was under her rules (supervision), etc?

I hope so ... or else you have "acquiescence" custody to her under:
Quote:
CLRA 20(4) Where the parents of a child live separate and apart and the child lives with one of them with the consent, implied consent or acquiescence of the other of them, the right of the other to exercise the entitlement of custody and the incidents of custody, but not the entitlement to access, is suspended until a separation agreement or order otherwise provides. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.12, s. 20 (4).
If you've given the impression that you were okay with it .... you basically agve your consent. If not....she's STOLEN your rights ... Not okay.

1. She needs to prove why you shouldn't see kids much.
2. She needs to prove why you need supervision.

Can she? Only you know the answer to that.

NEVER forget about the "Maximum Contact Principle"..as it is highly regarded in family law. Check out this thread on it....and USE it in court:

http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...eration-18320/

(edit): Oh yea...here are the CLRA's. Your bible for the next little bit.http://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90c12

Last edited by LovingFather32; 01-04-2016 at 08:34 PM.
Reply With Quote