Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Divorce & Family Law

Divorce & Family Law This forum is for discussing any of the legal issues involved in your divorce.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 05-08-2017, 11:59 PM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 55
Dad1985 is on a distinguished road
Default

I have found an email that I shared with my previous lawyer.

Attached is a text saying that I cant have my daughter at my parents house because they smoke too much. But can have her every other weekend once I get my own home.

The text was July 2015

Can this hold any weight?
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 05-09-2017, 03:25 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kitchener Ontario
Posts: 5,226
standing on the sidelines is on a distinguished road
Default

#############

Last edited by standing on the sidelines; 05-09-2017 at 03:30 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 05-09-2017, 08:06 AM
LovingFather32's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,518
LovingFather32 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad1985 View Post
I have found an email that I shared with my previous lawyer.

Attached is a text saying that I cant have my daughter at my parents house because they smoke too much. But can have her every other weekend once I get my own home.

The text was July 2015

Can this hold any weight?
Do you have anything from you stating that you weer not okay with her decisions? That you wanted to be in your child's life?

The smoking thing? he said/she said stuff. She'll say the kid smelled like smoke, which might be a valid reason to not have access there. Can she prove he smelled like smoke? Or.. Can you PROVE the kid didn't smell like smoke? Neither of you can prove anything....so the e-mail means nothing except her controlling nature and cancelling access.

Dig deeper!
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 05-09-2017, 10:14 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,681
trinton has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad1985 View Post
Attached is a text saying that I cant have my daughter at my parents house because they smoke too much. But can have her every other weekend once I get my own home.
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 05-09-2017, 11:08 AM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,563
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
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad1985 View Post
Mother - Recommended Sole custody to mother.
This is standard stuff for the OCL to do. It is almost the default. My recommendation would be to counter the OCL report stating parallel parenting.

You are advised to take school as your responsibility and give the other parent medical decisions. The reason being is if the child has no long-term disease then medical decisions are rare and never come up.

School has daily decisions and often is the lightning rod for disputes regarding habitual residential location. If you are the decision maker about schooling then moving a school is hard (or impossible) of the agreement is written properly. A lot turns on education!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad1985 View Post
Father - recommended 4 hours of unsupervised access to take place on the weekend (for the next 6 months).
Again, this is an OCL default. You should have never gone to the OCL. The OCL is inappropriate in 98% of cases. And in 98% of the cases they are involved with they only increase conflict. Very little is resolved with the OCL in my humble opinion. It just creates piles of hearsay evidence that you also have to deal with in litigation.

I read in this thread the child in question is 2 years old. In the Toronto Superior Court it would be rare to see an access order like this. I would say the same in the Peel Region as well. Justice Czutrin (Toronto) sets the bar very high for supervised access and non-50-50 of minor children like this. You basically have to be a complete and utter waste of time.

A lot of the old (and dismissed) "tender years doctrine" has been eliminated in most of the major family law jurisdictions but, if you are in a go-nowhere court house then you have issues as the modern concepts haven't evolved there. YOu will need a strong book of authorities on <3 year old access schedules.

Again, the recommendation for an access schedule should be 2-2-3-3. You should be asking the OCL why it is not appropriate. I would even recommend challenging the report if the clinician did not consider parallel parenting (a modern concept) or 2-2-3 access schedule (a modern concept). If there is no mention then you have a lot of ground to stand on.

If... you have about 150,000 in cash on hand to pay for a trial.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad1985 View Post
Parenting courses.
Just take one and get the certificate. Don't do a stupid online one. Do a real one. It is a complete waste of time for most people who are not nutjobs. Sort of like prenatal classes...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad1985 View Post
Counsiling to deal with stress of the situation.
My recommendation would be to skip the employer supplied stuff. They generally stuff you in with a social worker. I would recommend you find a psychologist (not a psychiatrist) who practices in cognative behaviour therapy and do about 10-16 sessions with them. Generally they cost about 220 an hour for a good one. That is what real therapy or counselling is to the court.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad1985 View Post
The current schedule is 2 hours at a play centre (Supervises) 1 hour at the mall (Supervised.)
Who supervises? You should have motioned right up front after the case conference for 2-2-3 access and parallel parenting. Consenting to anything less is NOT recommended. You have a lawyer. Not like you didn't have advice and couldn't have done this.

Time is the worst thing for most cases. You have to be proactive from the start. Don't sit on a bad arrangement. Motion to change it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad1985 View Post
My ex went in line with the OCL recommendations and granted the 4 hours this past sunday. We worked well together to communicate the exchange. She was fed, taken care of, and loved as expected. Although im concerned this is just to show her following of OCL.
It is. But, on the other hand. You have additional time with the child. Once many parents get a favourable OCL report they will hold it up like a golden idol and worship it. You are going to need to smash the idol.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad1985 View Post
My laywer was prepared to put an interim access order in place although since the time was granted at will, has decided not to. My lawyer sees this time as oppurtinity to develop new status quo and show im a perfectly competent parent.
With an OCL report like that you don't have any other option. A judge will push the matter to trial if you try to change anything now. Don't sit on a bad OCL report hoping things will magically get better. YOu are going to have to be the agent of change in all this. You are going to have a lot of work to do and a lot of $$ to spend if you want to "devistate" the OCL report.

I hope you have a very good lawyer.

Good Luck!
Tayken
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 05-09-2017, 11:08 AM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,563
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
Default

Are the grandparents blowing smoke in the child's face. If not... It is a bullshit argument and you should focus on the more important elements of the dispute that are relevant.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 05-09-2017, 02:21 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,563
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
Default

As I mentioned the "tender years doctrine" and Justice Czutrin in my previous post here is a great clip from Justice Czutrin on this very subject: https://youtu.be/ErF7bYzQmms?t=413 (@ 6:50 in the video if the link doesn't jump you forward)
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 05-09-2017, 02:32 PM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 55
Dad1985 is on a distinguished road
Default

Again, this is an OCL default. You should have never gone to the OCL. The OCL is inappropriate in 98%

Unfortunantly, it was advised by my previous lawyer who i made the mistake of hiring in the first place. Lesson learned.

I read in this thread the child in question is 2 years old. In the Toronto Superior Court it would be rare to see an access order like this

I should be expecting more than what OCL has recommended?

Again, the recommendation for an access schedule should be 2-2-3-3. You should be asking the OCL why it is not appropriate. I would even recommend challenging the report if the clinician did not consider parallel parenting (a modern concept) or 2-2-3 access schedule (a modern concept). If there is no mention then you have a lot of ground to stand on.


This is something i will keep in mind once we review the report and see the areas we will be disputing.

If... you have about 150,000 in cash on hand to pay for a trial.


I do not....My ex continues just to say NO to any kind of consideration to me being a father. Constantly brings up issues and paints a picture of me as someone im not. I would like to see possible changes in the settlement case. Id also like to avoid trail as much as possible. Ive had a hard time dealing with the idea this money could be going to my daughters future.

My recommendation would be to skip the employer supplied stuff. They generally stuff you in with a social worker. I would recommend you find a psychologist (not a psychiatrist) who practices in cognative behaviour therapy and do about 10-16 sessions with them. Generally they cost about 220 an hour for a good one. That is what real therapy or counselling is to the court.

I have already apporached my work assisstance program and been set up with a counsilor. I will look into your recommendation though. In the past i did see a clinician through ontario helps who would sit down with a psychologist and I. Past issues of anxiety have been dealt with and I have past and recent documents to show good health.

Who supervises?

MY Ex watches over the whole time. My previous lawyer did not advise during this time. I had made many requests with my lawyer to try to sort out more time. The only thing that came of that was expensive correspondance.

With an OCL report like that you don't have any other option. A judge will push the matter to trial if you try to change anything now.


Do you beleive trial is unavoidable at this point should my ex and i not come to terms? My lawyer intends on disputing the OCL report when we get it and before settlement
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 05-09-2017, 02:59 PM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 55
Dad1985 is on a distinguished road
Default

Pardon my ignorance at times.

"tender years doctrine"

Will the judge impose this along with other case law mentioed during the settlement case.
I do not feel at any time during this fight has any case law been used. My ex has simply kept my daughter away out of pure stubborness.

I do not want to come to an agreement in settlement that i do not agree with based on the terms i dont want to go to trial....but realistically i dont want to go to trial. My case seems so petty and is just being extended from my ex.
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 05-09-2017, 03:49 PM
LovingFather32's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,518
LovingFather32 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

This case sounds cut and dry to me.

Your ex unilaterally and abruptly cut your child out of your life.

You've struggled with anxiety .. but have dealt with it and have documentation to prove it.

Your ex makes up stories about cigarette smoke to deny access. NOT COOL!

A judge has told her to give more access .. she's not listening.

Read up on "The Maximum Contact Principle". Judges rely on this a LOT. You're not addicted to drugs/alcohol .. no history of abuse, etc. Thus, your ability to parent is NOT compromised.

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

Your ex will come in preaching "status quo" and how it shouldn't be disturbed. You will reply with .. "actually, it's a MANUFACTURED status quo" that you didn't consent to. She forced it upon you.

You dont need conferences my friend....you need a motion. If that doesn't work...a trial.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hamilton/GTA Section 30 Assessor Recommendations Halton_Dad Divorce & Family Law 6 05-24-2016 01:48 PM
Endorsements and Recommendations Of Dro Busch Divorce & Family Law 0 03-12-2016 08:26 AM
OCL recommendations MommyTime Divorce & Family Law 0 06-18-2014 05:24 PM
Understanding OCL Recommendations? OntarioDaddyMan Divorce & Family Law 5 04-11-2014 02:21 AM
Lawyer recommendations memyselfandi Divorce & Family Law 8 02-21-2012 12:14 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:36 AM.