View Single Post
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 01-27-2017, 09:55 PM
otttawa_dad otttawa_dad is offline
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 73
otttawa_dad is on a distinguished road

Here's a brief outline of what I want to discuss...

  • The current access schedule is not in the best interest of the children
  • The applicant is willing to amending the Access schedule on her terms only
  • Offer to extend Mondays and Wednesday until 8pm
  • Offer to extend Mondays and Wednesday until 8pm only on days the respondent has access and the applicant works
  • The current access schedule was based on a recommendation by the (OCL)
  • The OCL report was drafted when the Application was on Maternity leave
  • The fact the applicant claimed to be the primary caregiver
  • A2 was less than 1yr old
  • False allegations and collaborated efforts (neighbours)
  • Failed to see the result of the current schedule when the applicant returns to work
  • Prior to the separation
  • The respondent and applicant jointly cared for the children
  • The respondent would care for the children during the application work rotation.
  • The applicants parents rarely cared for A5 (1 occasion)
  • The respondent parents would care for the children if needed.
  • Since the Separation
  • The applicant, her parents, the respondent, school/daycare and NOW the 3rd party caregiver
  • Talk about CALENDAR
  • The current schedule offers no routine for the children and who cares for them
  • The children are constantly asking the respondent who’s picking them up at the end of the respondent access.
  • When the applicant is picking up the children the children constantly ask if the grandparents are there.
  • The school teacher suggested we provided the children with a visual calendar
  • The applicant schedule is based on shift work 4 x12hrs shifts 2Day Shifts and 2 Night Shifts
  • The morning of her 1st shift the applicant can no longer care for the children
  • The children’s routine is from 6:00am (awake) until 7:30-8:00 bed
  • During these times the applicant is either going to work , at work or coming back
  • The children are not in her care.
  • If the respondent has access; parents or caregiver pickup children
  • This is true for the 1st two day shifts in her rotation
  • The 3rd day a night shift, the applicant must rest during the day
  • The children are not in her care.
  • If the respondent has access; parents or caregiver pickup children

Temporary Day Care:
  • The applicant claims there’s no material change
  • The applicants parents are no longer a viable resources for care
  • The applicant hired a temporary caregiver as her parents could no longer provide care
  • Since being served with the motion Dec 12/2016
  • The applicant parents are now available to provide care
  • This is not a feasible solution; the applicant will eventually need help caring for the children again
  • The temporary caregiver services are still being used
  • On Jan 1st the applicant asked the respondent to drop off the boys at the end of his access. The applicant was working and the 3rd party caregiver.
  • On Jan 13th the application called the respondent to inform him A2 has a candy stuck in his nose and was going to CHEO. During the phone conversation the Respondent spoke with A5 who said the 3rd party caregiver was at home
  • The applicant is now further creating a change by mixing her parents and the 3rd party caregiver
  • The respondents proposed schedule is in the best interest of the children; allowing them maximum contact with both parents
  • The proposed schedule is the a viable solution to eliminate the need for 3rd party caregivers
  • The proposed schedule was in effect prior to the separation
  • The proposed schedule would benefit the children, the applicant and respondent
  • The proposed schedule would allow the applicant to spend more “quality” time with the children

Denying Access:
  • The applicant claims value the importance of the respondant in the children's life however;
  • The applicant fails to acknowledge the respondents request for more access and his abilities to care for the children.
  • The applicant unilaterally choose to allow 3rd parties to care for the children when she works
  • The applicant has denied access on multiple occasions; More recently
  • Jan 20th the repondant finished work early, he contacted the applicant to pick up the children early 3:30 as oppsed to 4:00. The applicant informed the respondent that A2 was sleeping. However the applicant was at work and her parents were caring for the children.
  • During the Christmas holidays, the respondent asked the applicant if A2 could stay overnight as opposed to the current access schedule which would have been A2 was to return to the applicant at 7:30. Regardless of the fact that the children have not been separated for months. The applicant denied this request. Furthermore on the 2 day of the Xmas schedule
  • The applicant denies access to the paternal grandparents and limits it to the time the respondent has access.
Reply With Quote