Visitations and Access of a 2 year old

[Stemmy]

Hello Again,

Further to my posting about audio recording my ex and her family.

I am wondering what would be considered appropriate as "liberal and reasonable access to the child"

My ex is consistently changing my requests and shortening them "in best interest" and it is strictly her need for FULL CONTROL!

Example I asked for 3 hours tomorrow and she is allowing 2.5, 3 hours on Wednesday and she denied it and 2.5 hours on Thursday and she is allowing me 2hr.

Also, does anyone have any caselaw and/or references for arguing shared custody with her being so young? Am I dreaming about this as this or is it a possiblity as I do not want to be a part time father as she is trying hard to make me.

I hate having to argue motions in court just because she is a PITA but it seems that this is the way it is.

Any help is appreciated.

[Teenwolf]

Do you currently have an access or custody agreement? If so, she has to follow the order because it would be illegal for her not to.

If you don't, and you can't agree with the other parent, then you'll have to go to court and let a judge decide. If you're a "fit" parent, then there's no reason why she would get sole custody. You stated in your other post that she has applied to the court for sole custody; however, the onus is on her to prove why you shouldn't have shared or joint custody. As a parent, you have a right to access your children and be involved in the decisions of their upbringing. The courts consider what's in the best interests of the children and involvement from both parents is deemed to be the best course of action for child socialization.

A parent loses his/her access and/or custody when s/he is unfit as a parent. This has to be proven in court with documented evidence. If your ex can't prove anything she claims, then she will not be successful in her sole custody application.

To find applicable case law, use the following link: CanLII - Advanced Search

Type in "sole custody" or "joint custody" and go from there. You'll likely get a lot of hits; be prepared to do some legwork. You can also filter search results to ON. Try to find something recent. Some of the older cases will be cited in the new ones.

My advice: ask the court for specified access. This will clearly define when you have access. From what you say, undefined times will lead to trouble down the road. A specified court order would say something like alternate weekends, specified time for summer vacation, splitting christmas and easter, having the child on father's day, etc.

[WorkingDAD]

best interest of a child is to spend as much time as possible with both parents.
all that bla bla bla is just bla bla bla unless there are some health issues.

The Children's Law Reform Act

s.24

Merits of application for custody or access
24. (1) The merits of an application under this Part in respect of custody of or
access to a child shall be determined on the basis of the best interests of the
child, in accordance with subsections (2), (3) and (4).

Best interests of child
(2) The court shall consider all the child's needs and circumstances, including,
(a) the love, affection and emotional ties between the child and,
(i) each person entitled to or claiming custody of or access to the child,
(ii) other members of the child's family who reside with the child, and
(iii) persons involved in the child's care and upbringing;
(b) the child's views and preferences, if they can reasonably be ascertained;
(c) the length of time the child has lived in a stable home environment;
(d) the ability and willingness of each person applying for custody of the child to provide the child with guidance and education, the necessaries of life and any special needs of the child;
(e) any plans proposed for the child's care and upbringing;
(f) the permanence and stability of the family unit with which it is proposed that the child will live;
(g) the ability of each person applying for custody of or access to the child to act as a parent; and
(h) the relationship by blood or through an adoption order between the child and each person who is a party to the application.

there is nothing in a law on any pediatrics recommendations that 2.yo. should not have overnights with dad. (even OCL in my case recommended to have it when child turn 2)

Stewart Croll v. Croll
20 month old child to be in Father's care from Monday mornings to Wednesday evenings every week

Waugh v. Waugh
17 month old to be in Father's care on Tuesday and Thursday evenings and alternating weekends from Friday evenings to Sunday evenings

Peterson v. Scalisi
3 year old placed primarily with Father, and Mother to have access on alternating weekends

Cooper v. Cooper
3 year old and 1 year old to be in father's care on alternating weekends and extended in the case of the 3 year old

Crocker v. Hooke
3 year old child to be in Father's care for three days (2 overnights) from 8 a.m. on the first day to 5 p.m. on the third day in the first week, to coincide with his days off work, and one day, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. in the second week

Huffman v. Kuffner
9 month old placed in Bench Father's custody and Mother to have access on alternating weekends

Szczecina v. Szczecina
9 month old to be in Father's care on alternate weekends from Fridays at 12 noon to Mondays at 12 noon

Heuss v. Surkos
2 year old (at time Judgment released) with access to the Father transitioned eventually to hours on the weekends, a Thursday evening following the access
weekend, and a Monday and Wednesday evening following the non-access
weekend.

and if mom claim breastfeeding (why not right?) starting point would be so called "breastfeeding case" the head line in the Globe and Mail article on April 27, 2009 was "Judge rules mom is milking her parental rights with breastfeeding defence". This is the case of Cavannah v. Jones

The unique facts in the Cavannah case included: the father's decision to re-locate to be closer to the mother and child; the father's status as a special needs teacher; the fact that the child had not witnessed any conflict between her parents; the fact that both parents supported a positive relationship with the other parent; the father's proactive decision to educate himself about young children, including taking parenting courses; and the mother's unwillingness to provide a timetable as to when breastfeeding would end (and corresponding basis for restricting the father's access).

and so on so on ... go to CanLii and do search for cases text.

and keep in mind Custody (decision making) Access (hopefully will be changed to parenting time) time arrangements where child lives and/or spend time with.

there is cases (I know at least one) where father have sole custody and 50/50 time share.

added:
just forgot one thing
section 16 of the Divorce Act (even if the matter is a Family Law Act proceeding):

Maximum contact
(10) In making an order under this section, the court shall give effect to the
principle that a child of the marriage should have as much contact with each spouse as is consistent with the best interests of the child and, for that purpose, shall take into consideration the willingness of the person for whom custody is sought to facilitate such contact.

[Access Dad]

I'm going through the same thing with access. I too have "liberal and reasonable." I now know it was just so that my ex could have control. She acted very cordial with me and basically gave me the feeling that I could see my child whenever I wanted and for however long I wanted. However, almost immediately after the Order came out, she changed. She was very righteous and controlling. "Liberal" and "Generous" and "Reasonable" are all very dangerous terms if you ask me. If you don't have fixed dates and times in a court order or agreement for access, then all it really means is that the custodial parent has full control and you cannot enforce your access unless your ex terminates or suspends your access. That's why I'm in court right now asking for specified access. My ex is fighting me all the way because she knows such an order will take the control our of her hands and that for some reason scares her. If you're going for access, get specified access and make sure it includes everything you want (i.e. overnight, holidays etc.) because you don't want to have to go back and change it.

[Teenwolf]

^^^^^ This is precisely why I recommended specified access to the OP.

Out of curiosity, on what grounds is your ex fighting specified access?

[HammerDad]

I have no idea why judges and/or lawyers continue to use such ambiguos wording. I work at a law firm and one of the first things I realized when contemplating the wording in my agreement is that such wording would work only in situations where the ex and I are a) on good terms and b) in agreement. Should there be any time where our relationship be contentious, this wording would leave me subject to the ex's approval.

I put in specified times from day 1 and have never had an issue exercising my parenting time. If a situation came up, either we agreed to makeup time or I got my D6...simple as that.

[WorkingDAD]

Originally Posted by HammerDad

I have no idea why judges and/or lawyers continue to use such ambiguos wording. I work at a law firm and one of the first things I realized when contemplating the wording in my agreement is that such wording would work only in situations where the ex and I are a) on good terms and b) in agreement. Should there be any time where our relationship be contentious, this wording would leave me subject to the ex's approval.

I put in specified times from day 1 and have never had an issue exercising my parenting time. If a situation came up, either we agreed to makeup time or I got my D6...simple as that.

I think I know why lawyers use it - just bring people back to fight.

[Teenwolf]

Originally Posted by WorkingDAD

I think I know why lawyers use it - just bring people back to fight.

That's an astute observation; I'm sure they would disagree.

[NBDad]

Sheesh, it's like you expect them to only drive ONE Mercedes. The nerve

[Access Dad]

Originally Posted by Teenwolf

^^^^^ This is precisely why I recommended specified access to the OP.

Out of curiosity, on what grounds is your ex fighting specified access?

Well that's where my story differs from the OP's. I have supervised access because a substance abuse problem. But I have now been clean and sober for 14 months and my ex is still saying that access should be continued to be at her discretion and supervised. Since I have filed as exhibits 2 hair follicle tests proving that I have been clean for more than a year, she cannot dispute my sobriety. So the only argument she has is that I haven't been sober long enough. She just doesn't want to lose control if I have unsupervised and specified access. I don't understand it really. I thought she would be proud of the changes I've made, but I'm completely floored by vigorous opposition to even the thought of my daughter and I having unsupervised access now that I've removed the risk factor. She was always very encouraging for me to get help and overcome my troubles. Now that I have done that, she wants access to remain supervised and unspecified.