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
  #371 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2017, 11:47 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 404
Ange71727 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingFather32 View Post
And here we're trying to determine who gets to decide what's best for the kids? Warring parents who's subjectivity overamplify negative qualities and minimize good qualities of the OP? Naaa....Judges who have to sift through 100 affidavits of garbage and somehow decide? Naaa. I think Tayken had it correct when he mentioned including more mental health pro's.

Tayken, myslef and a million readers arn't biased in favor of 50/50, we're looking at the "facts" and seems to us that in many case it is actually the best scenario for many reasons.

You keep saying it's not always best for the kids....and we'll KEEP agreeing.
We're talking about "in general".


Can you see how you're disallowing the 40% threshold (1 day) sure looks like you're avoiding it for financial reason also?

Did you read my caselaw. The mom there tried the same thing, saying he stopped paying CS in order to pressure her in to 50/50. The judge slammed her and gave him 50/50.

Yes of course some do it for money....peeps who dont want the OP to reach the 40% included or else CS would be affected(Hmmm). Hey...some people even vote for Trump. All sorts of people out there. It's important that you understand that we're talking in general terms....not everybody.


Or spending thousands in court trying to have an equal relationship with his kids. Have you followed your ex daily? You know he parties every night? Even if he did....he's been at 50/50 for 8 YEARS...so he's not sleeping or partying that much...try again. Have you ever made a mistake? Have you ever partied or slept in? Should we not allow you an equal relationship with your kids?

How can you hate someone, point out every bad quality, say he's "HARMED" your kids for 8 years....but let him be there at almost 50/50 for 8 years.....the second he wants a bit more time for an equal relationship ...BOOM...lets spend our kids education money in court? Yes...this crap is making me biased...it's disgusting to me....sorry.


Put your thinking cap on becasue Im going to ask you a zinger here.

Imagine that it was you who made some poor decisions VERY EARLY (remember he's been involved for 8 years...your argument is digging deep...for nothing...the judge won't want to discuss who changed diapers more...they're almost teens.).

You wake up one day with your pillow case soaked in tears and you want to be the best parent that you can. SO you do. You're now in the kids lives for 8 years at almost 50/50 and you LOVE it. You finally get the reno's done on your home, you have a good, stable relationship with your new partner...and just want an equal relationship with our kids.

Ange.......should your ex give you a chance for that extra day or 2? Or go to a big, expensive war with you? Which one is it?


Routine won't be changed much. He's been almost 50/50 for 8 years already.

Also, their routines will be changing big time as they transition in to teenagehood ...trust me. They'll need the support of both parents as much as possible.


Especially if one parent speaks negatively of the other parent and records them. Parents have to try VERY hard to keep their personal feelings aside.


Do you actually read the posts? I'll give you $1000 if you can find any post where I said "Maximum Contact" is ALWAYS best. Never said that...geez.

It's not absolute...but preferred in a vast majority of cases and backed up by an insurmountable amount of literature. There's a reason parliament has coined it the single most important component in which to consider.


Yes, every case has to be analyzed ..... but in GENERAL, based on the literature, parliament, caselaw etc...it's the best way to go.

What I don't want are posters reading your story and thinking that they have to have a huge, costly court battle over a few days extra access becasue they ca't stand the notion of dad being an equal parent.

Where's the CAS records? Where's the 24(4) violence and history of past abuse? Those are the tests that the judges rely on the most in considering on'es ability to act as a parent.

You need to stop making it sound like he just entered the kids life. He's been here for 8 years almost 50/50....very involved father. The kids are hitting turbulent teens soon and will need to confide in you both as much as possible. I would argue that as an MCC to the core.


Awesome....so you're not hung up on "quantity"...so give him an equal relationship then and focus on the quality. (If you want to deny him more access, I wouldn't say what you just said in court....or the judge will reply with what I said.

Now, lets bounce back to the literature regarding quality Vs. Quantity:

Quality Vs. Quantity:

Interestingly, many studies showed that "QUALITY" was directly correlated with "QUANTITY" of time kids spend with parent.

Bauserman, R. (2012) and Fabricius, W.V. et al (2011) found that:


Here are some findings:


Again, these studies have been replicated many many times and across different cultures, so they're highly reliable and valid.

Just be careful before assuming quality is better than quantity. If you really feel that then who cares about the "quantity" that you ex has with the kids anyways...stop denying him equal relationship.

Kids are entering the wonderful years of teenagehood .. a new chapter in life. Let dad be an equal parent in that new chapter. He's begging to be.


Yes, but in general, they thrive best when there is maximum contact with both parents. That's not just my opinion ... it's being supported by a ton of material. (remember, in general...not for everyone...not absolute). If I have to hear one more time "It's not for every child"..lol gah! We KNOW it's not for every child...but in general!


Sources:
Bauserman, R. (2012). "A meta-analysis of parental satisfaction, adjustment, and conflict in joint custody and sole custody following divorce," Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 53, 464-488.

Fabricius, W.V. et al (2011). “Parenting time, parent conflict, parent-child relationships, and children’s physical health.” In Kuehnle, K. & Drozd, L. (Eds.), Parenting Plan Evaluations: Applied Research for the Family Court. New York: Oxford University Press.


Just to be clear - my ex hasn't been "almost" at 50-50 for 8 years. The reason why I asked about calculating access time a couple weeks ago is because I wanted to verify the percentages. It is NOT a matter of adding one day in my case. It's not even a matter of adding two. It is a matter of completely changing a schedule that is working and the kids are happy with. All to suit his shift work schedule.
There is just too much here to respond to LF and we are going to have to disagree. You will never convince me that my ex has good intentions. I know my case best. We should probably just stop talking about it. I am not the only poster who is willing to go to court to maintain a status quo arrangement for the kids that I feel is in their best interests. You are worried that other posters might see this and think they can become "gatekeepers" as well (as you put it, I don't actually think that) but not every "denier" is doing it because they hate their ex.
It just irks me that you assume the worst for me (I'm just out for money) and you assume the best for him (he's crying into his pillow about missing his kids). There are lots of parents who worry that changing access arrangements will be a big mistake. As I look at it, the kids are happy and healthy and thriving. If they weren't I would want to change things. Who knows - maybe in the future it will change. Right now I am not comfortable with it. That's it and I'm not ashamed or afraid to say it even though there are many angry dads on here.
One more thing - a HUGE piece of this puzzle you don't talk about is the current relationship the kids have with each parent. This is a dynamic you know nothing of in my situation specifically (and I haven't spoken of much) that MUST be considered. A judge will look into this piece for sure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #372 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2017, 02:18 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:
You will never convince me that my ex has good intentions.
All I'm trying to say is instead of going bankrupt on lawyers .. give the benefit of doubt to him. If it doesn't work....then go bankrupt with lawyers. He didn't just walk in to their life. He's BEEN there already for 8 years.

I would also counter your statement with "You don't know for a fact that he has "bad" intentions.

Quote:
I am not the only poster who is willing to go to court to maintain a status quo arrangement for the kids that I feel is in their best interests.
The mother in the caselaw I posted tried what you are...and dad got 50/50.
I have a list of cases where that has occurred if you'd like me to post them.

Quote:
There are lots of parents who worry that changing access arrangements will be a big mistake
And there are many who have done it and found it very helpful across all developmental domains and relationships, tensions over not seeing kids enough, court battles, etc. Just saying.

Quote:
You are worried that other posters might see this and think they can become "gatekeepers" as well (as you put it, I don't actually think that) but not every "denier" is doing it because they hate their ex.
Nope. But you're inconsistent with your posts about your ex and kids unfortunately, which raises a red flag.

Quote:
Who knows - maybe in the future it will change. Right now I am not comfortable with it.
Glad to see you're open to it in the future. If I was the dad reading these forums I'd love to bring that statement up. Sorry to hear about your comfort levels at the moment. Unfortunately the judge won't give a flying F^&% about your comfort....it'll be about the best interests of the children. I'm sure you know that though.

Quote:
That's it and I'm not ashamed or afraid to say it even though there are many angry dads on here.
Not angry...confused. Your stories are inconsistent and based on the details you did provide (which is all we have to go on)...there's absolutely no reason that an equal parenting arrangement shouldn't be taking place....regardless of your "comfort level".

Quote:
As I look at it, the kids are happy and healthy and thriving. If they weren't I would want to change things.
This is what I mean about being "inconsistent" in your stories. In another post you claim he is "HARMING" your kids and that you can see the effects from it. Now they're happy and thriving. Which one is it Ange?
You'll be eaten alive in court with stuff like that.

If you want to discuss your case more I'm open to it. If not I suggest not replying to this post so we can move on. Up to you.

LF32
Reply With Quote
  #373 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2017, 02:41 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 404
Ange71727 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingFather32 View Post
All I'm trying to say is instead of going bankrupt on lawyers .. give the benefit of doubt to him. If it doesn't work....then go bankrupt with lawyers. He didn't just walk in to their life. He's BEEN there already for 8 years.



I would also counter your statement with "You don't know for a fact that he has "bad" intentions.





The mother in the caselaw I posted tried what you are...and dad got 50/50.

I have a list of cases where that has occurred if you'd like me to post them.





And there are many who have done it and found it very helpful across all developmental domains and relationships, tensions over not seeing kids enough, court battles, etc. Just saying.





Nope. But you're inconsistent with your posts about your ex and kids unfortunately, which raises a red flag.





Glad to see you're open to it in the future. If I was the dad reading these forums I'd love to bring that statement up. Sorry to hear about your comfort levels at the moment. Unfortunately the judge won't give a flying F^&% about your comfort....it'll be about the best interests of the children. I'm sure you know that though.





Not angry...confused. Your stories are inconsistent and based on the details you did provide (which is all we have to go on)...there's absolutely no reason that an equal parenting arrangement shouldn't be taking place....regardless of your "comfort level".





This is what I mean about being "inconsistent" in your stories. In another post you claim he is "HARMING" your kids and that you can see the effects from it. Now they're happy and thriving. Which one is it Ange?

You'll be eaten alive in court with stuff like that.



If you want to discuss your case more I'm open to it. If not I suggest not replying to this post so we can move on. Up to you.



LF32


I am a well educated and well prepared individual when it comes to learning about and mastering something. When I research and prepare for things in my life I go all in. The things I am chatting about on a forum are not exactly worded the precise way they will be in court when I reflect on the best way to present it.
Also, I don't think I've been inconsistent at all but that's your opinion.
As for your caselaw - thank you. The more I know the better. However, I think the biggest obstacle will be proving a material change. There really isn't one in my case.
We can move on though...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #374 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2017, 03:06 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
Also, I don't think I've been inconsistent at all but that's your opinion.
This is inconsistent:

1. He's doing "harm" to the children....I can see the effects.
2. The kids are thriving and happy.

It's not my opinion. You stated both pretty clearly. Can't have it both ways.

Quote:
However, I think the biggest obstacle will be proving a material change. There really isn't one in my case.
Agreed. I don't know if he has what it takes to prove a material change. I'd have to hear his case....could be really good. I do know that the kids are entering a NEW period in life (teenagehood) which come with new challenges, feelings and thoughts. You wouldn't believe the studies, etc I would come in with to support my stance in equal parenting with teenagers VS young children. or preteens. I hope he does the same...because the circumstances DO change. The way you parent, the way you communicate, evolving romantic relationships....SO MUCH changes with teens actually!

The problem is that you're having troubles keeping your story straight.

You say that you see the effects of the "harm" he's causing them
VS.
You say they're happy and thriving.

Just be sure to get your story straight before entering the courtroom would be my advice to you.

It's inconsistent, contradictory statements like these that make me wonder.

Many posters tried to catch inconsistencies in my hundreds of pages of threads, but they never could because I just stuck to the truth. (So easy to remember the truth) .. .when they realized they couldn't find any holes in my story some had a tantrum and called me a "catfish" .. that I wasn't a real person. LMAO

Anyways ... just decide what path your going. He harmed them and you can see the effects OR they're happy and thriving. Can't have it both ways my dear.

Last edited by LovingFather32; 01-29-2017 at 03:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #375 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2017, 04:38 PM
LovingFather32's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,518
LovingFather32 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Here you describe the harm being done to your children:

Quote:
I should add too that we may have differing definitions of "harm". I do think that it is harmful for a child to hear that their mother is lying about something. I do think it's harmful for a kid to see an image of dad vacationing with a woman who isn't his girlfriend. There are other harmful items as well....
They may not leave a bruise, a scar, any physical trace but what are they doing to their impressionable minds?”
http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...0/index10.html
More concern of alienation (harm):

Quote:
Hopefully he won't have succeeded in damaging the relationship I have with them”
And even more concerns of alienation (harm):

Quote:
He has been ]manipulating the kids to think less of me[/B] (attempting to by again making up stories).
http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...e-court-20649/

But this is the biggy because you now state that they're happy and thriving...but here you state:

Quote:
However, I am also worried about things he says about me to the kids. I already see the effects of it.
You certainly didn't say you're concerned you MAY see the effects....you very clearly stated you ALREADY see the effects. Happy and thriving?
Reply With Quote
  #376 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2017, 04:40 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,681
trinton has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

I wonder if those^ effects are the material change in circumstances
Reply With Quote
  #377 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2017, 05:35 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,567
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

This thread:

Reply With Quote
  #378 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2017, 06:06 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 2,838
stripes is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingFather32 View Post
This is inconsistent:

1. He's doing "harm" to the children....I can see the effects.
2. The kids are thriving and happy.

It's not my opinion. You stated both pretty clearly. Can't have it both ways.


Agreed. I don't know if he has what it takes to prove a material change. I'd have to hear his case....could be really good. I do know that the kids are entering a NEW period in life (teenagehood) which come with new challenges, feelings and thoughts. You wouldn't believe the studies, etc I would come in with to support my stance in equal parenting with teenagers VS young children. or preteens. I hope he does the same...because the circumstances DO change. The way you parent, the way you communicate, evolving romantic relationships....SO MUCH changes with teens actually!

The problem is that you're having troubles keeping your story straight.

You say that you see the effects of the "harm" he's causing them
VS.
You say they're happy and thriving.

Just be sure to get your story straight before entering the courtroom would be my advice to you.

It's inconsistent, contradictory statements like these that make me wonder.

Many posters tried to catch inconsistencies in my hundreds of pages of threads, but they never could because I just stuck to the truth. (So easy to remember the truth) .. .when they realized they couldn't find any holes in my story some had a tantrum and called me a "catfish" .. that I wasn't a real person. LMAO

Anyways ... just decide what path your going. He harmed them and you can see the effects OR they're happy and thriving. Can't have it both ways my dear.

LF, please just drop it. You think the other poster is wrong. You made your points. You are not "helping" by challenging her arguments the way a lawyer would, you are going on and on and on about your own interpretation of her situation. A bigger person would just walk away now.

And, here's a tip: don't address women you don't know as "my dear" (or "sweetie" or "honey" or any other term that suggests you have a personal relationship with them). It's condescending and rude. Would you like it if I had ended the paragraph above with "sonny boy" or "my little man"?
Reply With Quote
  #379 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2017, 06:32 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,681
trinton has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stripes View Post
LF, please just drop it. You think the other poster is wrong. You made your points. You are not "helping" by challenging her arguments the way a lawyer would, you are going on and on and on about your own interpretation of her situation. A bigger person would just walk away now.

And, here's a tip: don't address women you don't know as "my dear" (or "sweetie" or "honey" or any other term that suggests you have a personal relationship with them). It's condescending and rude. Would you like it if I had ended the paragraph above with "sonny boy" or "my little man"?
I think "my dear" sounds a lot more formal than sonny boy or "my little man" but anyway, as an attempt to steer the thread back into the right direction..

Quote:
g. Physical separation between parents usually entails some continuing geographic proximity -- usually within the same community. Where travel time and arrangements are not a serious complicating factor, courts can determine timesharing and other parenting issues purely on the basis of "best interests" considerations. Maximum contact with both parents is presumed to be beneficial. Berry v. Berry, 2011 ONCA 705 (CanLII), 2011 ONCA 705 (Ont. C.A.).

h. Frequency of contact is particularly important for young children. Where parents continue to reside in relatively close proximity to one another, courts have more options to ensure a sensitive and evolutionary approach to parenting issues. Rifai v. Green (supra).
Reply With Quote
  #380 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2017, 08:07 PM
LovingFather32's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,518
LovingFather32 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Oh Stripes....I call my mom, grandma, daughters dear. Its not rude or condecending. I meant nothing by it. Give me a break.

Why dont you come to my rescue when posters attack my gender....like "mansplaining",etc. Guess thats okay?

Pleeeesse call me Sonny Boy. I beg you. I love that. No more LF32 Stripes.. Only Sonny Boy please.
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 10:03 AM.