Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Political Issues

Political Issues This forum is for discussing the political aspects of divorce: reform to divorce laws, men's rights, women's rights, injustices in the divorce system, etc.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #351 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2017, 02:35 PM
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 arabian View Post
Denying 50/50 is definitely not best in every scenario. However, I do not necessarily believe that 50/50 should be automatic in every situation either.

I agree with Stripes' post specifically: "kids can thrive in all different forms of family arrangement. The biggest predictor of how kids fare after a divorce is not whether they have a 50/50 arrangement or not, but the level of conflict between Mom and Dad before, during and after the divorce" and would add that much research needs to be done, including collection of statistical data. I would really like to see surveys narrowed down to show why, specifically, people end up in litigation (perceived alienation, denying access, change of parents' work schedules, etc.) along with details on whether or not people are self-represented, have legal aid representation or paid-for lawyers. Now that would be interesting don't you think?

I love ya too LF32.
Aww...making me blush Arabian. ;-)

I personally have been studying it (because Im a nerd) and have access to academic journal databases (gawd...I'm really a nerd).

It seems most the literature reveals what my post above did.

1. Parental conflict goes down in equal parenting.
2. Both children and parents report better life satisfaction and develop in a healthier manner.

Equal parenting certainly isn't for all cases, but these studies speak "loudly" for themselves and the population in general.

Many of the cases these studies rely on are after hugely acrimonious family law wars and not simple agreements.
Reply With Quote
  #352 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2017, 02:36 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,048
Berner_Faith will become famous soon enough
Default

Has any case law been posted that shows a parent that has 40% access be granted 50%? I'm not certain we are arguing the same thing here. Angie's ex seems to have shared parenting at around 40% and while only a day or two extra a month would get the ex to that 50% I am wondering what cases support this? CS aside as it should already be offset, I would be interested in reading a case where a parent was able to gain a couple extra days a month to move from 40% to 50%


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #353 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2017, 02:41 PM
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 Berner_Faith View Post
Has any case law been posted that shows a parent that has 40% access be granted 50%? I'm not certain we are arguing the same thing here. Angie's ex seems to have shared parenting at around 40% and while only a day or two extra a month would get the ex to that 50% I am wondering what cases support this? CS aside as it should already be offset, I would be interested in reading a case where a parent was able to gain a couple extra days a month to move from 40% to 50%


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes I have.

In Gill v. Chiang, 2011 ONSC 6803

Quote:
Quote:
The original Award gave 65% of the access time to the Mother, together with custody, and 35% to the Father. This percentage has now been reduced to 60% to her and 40% to him. They cannot, says the Mother, seem to be able to make decisions together”.
Like another posters case.......


Quote:
James stopped paying child support entirely and abruptly in April, 2010 and I believe that was for the sole purpose of putting pressure on me to agree to the parenting change that he was requesting, namely, that the residence schedule in the Arbitration Award of Linda Chodos be changed to a 50/50 or week on week off arrangement
Much like another posters case:

Quote:
The Mother’s position is that there has not been a material change in circumstances, which would lead to a variation of the Arbitration Award with respect to custody and access”.
Very similar situation. I think she had status quo for 7 years. Here's what the judge had to say:


Quote:
The Mother sees no material change in circumstances, which would lead to a variation. She says that the Father is unable to set aside his own feelings about her and does nothing to foster her relationship with her. I have set out examples in these Reasons, which support the Mother’s position about the Father’s behaviour. That, in my view, does not mean that there has not been a material change in circumstances. While the Mother relies upon the Court’s findings in Reeves v. Reeves, 2001 CarswellOnt 277 (O.S.C.J.), I do not find it applicable in the circumstances of this case”
Dad got his 50/50:


Quote:
1. The Order of Madam Justice Allen made July 2, 2009 shall be varied so that the child access provision under the Arbitration Award is changed from what is currently a 60:40 split between the Mother and the Father, to a week on/ week off commencing January 1, 2012.”
There are many cases like this Berner.
Reply With Quote
  #354 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2017, 03:37 PM
arabian's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 9,961
arabian will become famous soon enough
Default

50/50 with a week on week off would appeal to me personally if I were in that situation or even every two weeks. I would think that less frequency of change of residences for children would be better no? or does that create more problems in other ways?
Reply With Quote
  #355 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2017, 04:22 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 73
otttawa_dad is on a distinguished road
Default

LF32. I think I could use this in my motion.

Ie: mother doesn't see the material change.


Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingFather32 View Post
Yes I have.



In Gill v. Chiang, 2011 ONSC 6803



Quote:





Like another posters case.......









Much like another posters case:





Very similar situation. I think she had status quo for 7 years. Here's what the judge had to say:







Dad got his 50/50:









There are many cases like this Berner.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #356 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2017, 05:09 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 404
Ange71727 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingFather32 View Post
Yes I have.



In Gill v. Chiang, 2011 ONSC 6803



Quote:





Like another posters case.......









Much like another posters case:





Very similar situation. I think she had status quo for 7 years. Here's what the judge had to say:







Dad got his 50/50:









There are many cases like this Berner.


Yes dad got his 50/50 in this case. However, there are many other factors going on upon reading it thoroughly. Most notably to me is that the kids involved were teenagers, subjected to their parents constant fighting and both expressed their desires for it to be "fair". I'm sure the desires of teenaged kids were a huge influence for the judge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #357 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2017, 05:51 PM
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 Ange71727 View Post
Yes dad got his 50/50 in this case. However, there are many other factors going on upon reading it thoroughly. Most notably to me is that the kids involved were teenagers, subjected to their parents constant fighting and both expressed their desires for it to be "fair". I'm sure the desires of teenaged kids were a huge influence for the judge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Your right. There are many factors to analyze. I'm sure there are in your case as well.

Berner wanted a case where there was a long status quo (like yours)....dad was almost at 50% anyways.. (like yours) ... mom thought no Material Change (like yours) ...... judge granted 50/50.

I think a judge may say "Geez...why not?....its only a day or 2" instead of..."Nooo way this father, whos been heavily involved at almost 50/50 for 8 years cannot have 50/50".

The former just sounds more logical to me.

Last edited by LovingFather32; 01-28-2017 at 06:00 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #358 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2017, 09:01 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 404
Ange71727 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingFather32 View Post
Your right. There are many factors to analyze. I'm sure there are in your case as well.

Berner wanted a case where there was a long status quo (like yours)....dad was almost at 50% anyways.. (like yours) ... mom thought no Material Change (like yours) ...... judge granted 50/50.

I think a judge may say "Geez...why not?....its only a day or 2" instead of..."Nooo way this father, whos been heavily involved at almost 50/50 for 8 years cannot have 50/50".

The former just sounds more logical to me.


It's more than just a day or two that he wants. It would be quite a schedule change. You are also making up the heavily involved part. Who said he was "heavily involved?"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #359 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2017, 09:30 PM
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 Ange71727 View Post
It's more than just a day or two that he wants. It would be quite a schedule change. You are also making up the heavily involved part. Who said he was "heavily involved?"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I really don't want to make this thread about you Ange....but you and others keep bringing your case up....so I'll post my thoughts.

If your ex has been at almost 50/50 for all this time, that would mean that he's obviously involved with the kids. They're there almost half the time.

Despite your claims that he's "harmed" (please try not to say you didn't say that) your kids for many years (you've kept notes on his terrible parenting you say), now you claim he hasn't been heavily involved in their life.

I read a ton of caselaw where one parent tries that (including my ex). The judge may tell you exactly what I did. He's been almost 50/50 for 8 years....how can he not be involved if he's been almost 50/50 for 8 years?

He's been heavily involved whether you like it or not. If you've been involved a bit more in certain aspects... that still doesn't mean the kids should miss an opportunity for a 50/50 regime with 2 loving parents.

I can almost guarantee he will show up with pics and documents of he and the kids doing activities, receipts, etc. Be ready for that. If he wasn't as involved in academics, that doesn't mean he hasn't in other parts of life.

Last edited by LovingFather32; 01-28-2017 at 09:33 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #360 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2017, 11:16 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,048
Berner_Faith will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingFather32 View Post
Your right. There are many factors to analyze. I'm sure there are in your case as well.

Berner wanted a case where there was a long status quo (like yours)....dad was almost at 50% anyways.. (like yours) ... mom thought no Material Change (like yours) ...... judge granted 50/50.

I think a judge may say "Geez...why not?....its only a day or 2" instead of..."Nooo way this father, whos been heavily involved at almost 50/50 for 8 years cannot have 50/50".

The former just sounds more logical to me.


Thank you for the above case. I will certainly read them. I am genuinely curious at how often this is orders and the reasons. I find it strange when 60-40 is ordered rather than 50-50



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
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 Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Faulty to assume Shared Parenting: here's why SilverLining Divorce & Family Law 44 06-29-2014 02:41 PM
Velacott's new Bill C-560 (equal parenting) SingingDad Political Issues 16 06-13-2014 04:04 PM
Equal Shared Parenting Mother Divorce & Family Law 56 02-21-2014 05:43 PM
Equal parenting Bill tabled in house of commons SingingDad Divorce & Family Law 1 12-17-2013 09:43 AM
Vellacott celebrates National Child Day with announcement of Equal Parenting bill logicalvelocity Political Issues 7 11-24-2008 07:22 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:43 PM.