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
  #431 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2017, 01:25 PM
LovingFather32's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,515
LovingFather32 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tayken View Post
Feel free to bicker amongst yourselves. You are simply convincing each other of your points. Look at the thread from an outside view without the personal dynamics going on. Is there really valuable information being shared with the broader community? Or is this an ideological debate between a few people who do not like each other and continually debate topics like this on a personal level without a larger view of the entire audience to this site.

I am seeing more ad hominem discussion than an actual debate on the subject matter that was the original intent of this thread.

The reality is that the posters contributing to this thread have their own personal set of beliefs that no matter how hard you try to debate them they are not going to change their perspective. Nor is there any residual value in trying to convince them otherwise.

Time would be better spent helping people rather than confusing them with personal attacks and ideological debate.
I don't think bickering is our focus. I think it's a byproduct of a healthy debate on 50/50. I think there's a bit of bickering in all politics.

I would like to point out Tayken that I have many private messages thanking me for the thread. I know it gets messy at times...but there's still some good stuff here.

Remember, one persons's trash is another person's treasures. I know my threads can be long and drawn out so I do get what you're saying. But they are in fact helping some people out there .. So they are of some value for sure.

Tayken, some of your expertise in this area of family law would be greatly appreciated.
Reply With Quote
  #432 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2017, 01:26 PM
LovingFather32's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,515
LovingFather32 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tayken View Post
Avoid the ad hominem attacks and ignore the ones that people are making against you. As soon as people bring "personal experience" into the thread or try to attack your own personal experience. They are simply trying to derail what could be a valuable exploration of the topic.

You are easily baited by some posters. Don't fall for their typical cyclical arguments. Break the cycle and you could save it.

You may want to re-frame the discussion again. This is your thread really. So don't let those who have a personal dislike of you derail you.

Good Luck!
Tayken
Now this I agree with. Getting baited is my weakness. I'm working on it. lol
Reply With Quote
  #433 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2017, 01:33 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,469
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 Ange71727 View Post
So what do people think about the current caselaw that a material change must be proven in order to vary an access agreement? If 50/50 should be automatic unless a parent is unfit, addiction, abuse, etc then why do the courts require that a material change that affects the children be present?
I am of the humble opinion that the system of case law has given the necessary jurisprudence for a number of solutions to provide a conflict reduced environment where equal residency could be the case in many situations where it was not possible in the past.

Namely "parallel parenting". The conflict from decision making was always the concern and the courts for many years washed over the complexity. Recently in the past 5-10 years the judiciary has really contemplated the opportunities of detailed orders to reduce parental conflict. This combined with different access schedules (2-2-5-5 2-2-3 week about et all) provide judges with the necessary tools to reduce (and possibly eliminate) conflict and provide children the opportunity to share equal residency with both parents.

In fact, if you search my threads you will find many postings to CanLII where justices do this right off the bat now on "urgent" motions. Coe v. Tope is a prime example.

Coe v. Tope, 2014 ONSC 4002 (CanLII)
Date: 2014-07-03
Docket: 2839/14
Citation: Coe v. Tope, 2014 ONSC 4002 (CanLII)
http://canlii.ca/t/g7w9n

Most people believe that legislative changes is the only way the law changes. I would suggest that more changes out of our system of jurisprudence than in legislature. Especially for complex areas of law like family law. Evolutionary change is needed and that is happening in case law.

As justices rotate out of the old guard and new judges who are versed in these new principals and case law come into the system. Change occurs over time.

That is why the best interests test is so vague. To allow this evolution in the system of jurisprudence. Because NOT ALL CASES are identical. Family law is nuanced. Each case is unique but, there are a common set of principals for judges to rely upon on improving orders in our system of jurisprudence.

Systemic change in family law comes from case law... not legislation. To look to legislation to change it is not the only option.

Unfortunately, the system of case law is very complex. I am for a system where reporting of case law in family law should be distributed to justices and that a better structure on who is a family law justice needs to be put in place to serve the court. Justice Czutrin is working on this I believe and is a huge leader in this as the lead family justice in Ontario. With other justices like Pazaratz out there a lot of change has already come. More is coming...

Good Luck!
Tayken
Reply With Quote
  #434 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2017, 01:36 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,469
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 LovingFather32 View Post
Now this I agree with. Getting baited is my weakness. I'm working on it. lol
More than often I think this happens to your threads...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2DxDPHjSak

You have a good idea and then a nasty pike comes by and takes it from you.
Reply With Quote
  #435 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2017, 01:42 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,469
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 LovingFather32 View Post
I don't think bickering is our focus. I think it's a byproduct of a healthy debate on 50/50. I think there's a bit of bickering in all politics.
The bickering is deluding what could be a good debate, though. It's like watered down Tang right now. Tang isn't great in the first place. Watered down it is just awful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingFather32 View Post
I would like to point out Tayken that I have many private messages thanking me for the thread. I know it gets messy at times...but there's still some good stuff here.
It is too messy right now. This thread is like walking through a hoarder's house at the momment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingFather32 View Post
Remember, one persons's trash is another person's treasures. I know my threads can be long and drawn out so I do get what you're saying. But they are in fact helping some people out there .. So they are of some value for sure.
See my link above as my counter to "trash" vs. "treasure". I think the poop lady may agree with you. But, I don't agree really. Its just poop. It isn't treasured at the moment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingFather32 View Post
Tayken, some of your expertise in this area of family law would be greatly appreciated.
See my post and attempt to draw attention to a very complex area of change. Jurisprudence. How does jurisprudence create change in family law? How does it help? How does family law evolve without the need to update legislation which is a painfully long and awful process? Can the normalization of 50-50 residency be strengthened through good case law? (I believe it has and continues to be.)

Good Luck!
Tayken
Reply With Quote
  #436 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2017, 01:45 PM
LovingFather32's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,515
LovingFather32 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Thanks Tayken. Some hard love but I tend to agree more than disagree with you.

Lets start on fresh footing.

Tayken organized a good discussion on caselaw, jurisprudence and if 50/50 residency can be strengthened by good case law?

Quote:
See my post and attempt to draw attention to a very complex area of change. Jurisprudence. How does jurisprudence create change in family law? How does it help? How does family law evolve without the need to update legislation which is a painfully long and awful process? Can the normalization of 50-50 residency be strengthened through good case law? (I believe it has and continues to be.)
What are your thoughts?
Reply With Quote
  #437 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2017, 02:32 PM
trinton's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,530
trinton has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingFather32 View Post
Thanks Tayken. Some hard love but I tend to agree more than disagree with you.

Lets start on fresh footing.

Tayken organized a good discussion on caselaw, jurisprudence and if 50/50 residency can be strengthened by good case law?


What are your thoughts?

I think family law is constantly evolving generation by generation and is evolving by case law.

remember this case law I shared?

Quote:
[15] There is no issue that the children’s time with both parents should be maximized as much as possible: see s. 16(10) of the Divorce Act. It is also true that shared custody is becoming increasingly frequent, especially in light of the fact that in today’s world both parents often work and equally share care of the children.
Father didn't get shared parenting on that interim motion. But a year later, has now won it on a final basis with very valid reasons.

Quote:
[15] Alternate weeks would have the boys transition only once a week, would maximize contact with each parent and would make transparent each of the parent’s school responsibilities. Homework could not be left until the other parents’ night. There would be fewer prospects of agendas going unsigned or things being left behind, particularly if the transition was on a Sunday evening.

[68] I have reviewed each of the parent’s Form 35.1 Parenting Affidavits and considered their evidence as a whole. In my view, the complexity of their lives is the most striking feature. Both work hard at full time, demanding employment positions while raising three very busy, very active young boys, the oldest of which has significant, 24 hour special needs.

[69] It is easy to forget just how demanding, complicated and simply exhausting this stage of life can be, let alone for parents who are separated. Every transition between the parents’ homes requires planning and organization. Reducing those transitions would reduce the stress on the parents and the children.

[70] After much consideration, I find that a week-about residency plan is the simplest and most child friendly order that can be made on the evidence before me. It will reduce transitions to once a week, minimize the exchange of sports equipment, school necessities, medical supplies and G.’s equipment, and personal items. The boys will have quality time with each parent and neither parent will unduly bear the responsibilities of the school week. Each parent will have a full week’s rest and the opportunity to maximize his or her income during the week off.

[71] The court’s main concern with the week-about proposal is the length of time that each child will go without seeing the other parent. I propose to remedy this by requiring that each parent spend group, or one-on-one time with the children while in the care of the other parent. Done well, and with flexibility, such an approach provides the additional benefit of dividing up transportation when the boys have conflicting schedules.

[72] For example, during the father’s weeks, the boys might go to their mother’s from after school on Thursdays (the mid-point during the seven days) until 8:00 that evening; and during the mother’s weeks, the father might take each of the boys to a practice, game or activity during the week; or vice versa – depending on individual schedules. In this manner, the weeks will flow in a more natural fashion, with each parent primarily responsible for a seven week period, but the boys having time with the other parent for a mid-week meal, or travel to a practice/game.

[73] The court grants the father’s claim for a week-about parenting plan, with a default schedule to ensure that the boys see the other parent during the seven days when he is not residing with him or her. The parties are encouraged to frequently renegotiate the default schedule, so that it best meets the needs of their busy family, including coordinating with step-parents, step-siblings and extended family. Mediation is recommended. If for some reason mediation cannot be engaged, the parents are to exchange proposals through the Family Wizard, at least 30 days in advance of any change in extracurricular schedules. In the absence of an agreement, the default order will prevail..
And another order that was made just 4 days ago, for shared parenting

Quote:
0] Bonita Van Ryk has asked, with respect to parenting and access, to preserve the status quo. Stephen Van Ryk has asked for shared parenting and access, one week on/one week off, with the exchange occurring through drop off at school on Wednesday mornings by one parent, and pick up from school on Wednesday afternoons by the other, thereby avoiding direct contact between the parents.

[41] Counsel for Braedon indicated he wanted to spend his time at both homes evenly but agreed it would be appropriate if there was a transition plan to last for a few months, moving from the status quo to shared parenting and equal access.

[42] The Divorce Act provides that a court may make an order respecting access (s 16(1)), including joint access, otherwise known as joint parenting (s 16(4)) for a definite or indefinite period, on terms, conditions or restrictions that the court thinks fit and just (s 16(6)), and 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 (s 16(10)).

[43] Based upon all of the evidence set out above with respect to custody and decision-making, and for all of the reasons expressed in that area, I determine that it would be in the best interest of Braedon that Stephen and Bonita Van Ryk have shared parenting for and access to him. I also agree that there should be a transition period from the date of these Reasons until equal weekly access.

[44] As a result, between February 1 and April 5, 2017, there shall be a transition period whereby Stephen Van Ryk will have access from every second Wednesday after the close of the school day until the following Monday morning at the beginning of the school day. I have set out a schedule in conclusions to these Reasons.

[45] Commencing on April 5, 2017, Stephen Van Ryk will have Braedon on a shared parenting basis from Wednesday at the close of the school day until the next Wednesday at the close of the school day, Bonita Van Ryk will have custody from the end of the school day on that Wednesday until the following Wednesday at the end of the school day, with ongoing alternating weekly parenting and access until Braedon reaches the age of 18.

[46] With respect to the summer months of July and August, Stephen Van Ryk shall have Braedon from July 1 to July 15, Bonita from July 16 to July 31, Stephen from August 1 to August 15, and Bonita from August 16 to August 31, reversing those dates every other year. I have set out a schedule in the conclusions to these Reasons.

[47] With respect to Christmas holidays, the Consent Order dated March 27, 2015 shall continue.

[48] Additionally, Stephen Van Ryk shall purchase a smart phone for Braedon so that Braedon can have telephone, text and applications contact with each of his parents at his discretion.
Shared custody is the way of the future, and case law is the evidence.

Last edited by trinton; 01-31-2017 at 02:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #438 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2017, 02:55 PM
LovingFather32's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,515
LovingFather32 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

The caselaw depends on the case and all of the intricate details.

What I would like to see is all the BS weeded out (unfounded allegations, etc) and a standard set of criteria similar to 24(4) of the CLRA whereby one's actual "ability to parent" is thoroughly analyzed.

I'm passionate about 50/50 because of what the caselaw and studies are producing. There's a definite evolution towards shared, 50/50 parenting ... but as seen in the views of this thread...we just arn't there yet.

If I can reach 100 parents through threads like this to not give up fighting for 50/50...to not drown in the system...then I feel I've done my job and that those 100 cases will turn in to potent case law and eventually alter legislation.

50/50 may not be for everyone. But it should be the starting point (in the absence of any abuse, addictions, etc). I think we're on our way there.
Reply With Quote
  #439 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2017, 03:36 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,035
Berner_Faith will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tayken View Post
Feel free to bicker amongst yourselves. You are simply convincing each other of your points. Look at the thread from an outside view without the personal dynamics going on. Is there really valuable information being shared with the broader community? Or is this an ideological debate between a few people who do not like each other and continually debate topics like this on a personal level without a larger view of the entire audience to this site.



I am seeing more ad hominem discussion than an actual debate on the subject matter that was the original intent of this thread.



The reality is that the posters contributing to this thread have their own personal set of beliefs that no matter how hard you try to debate them they are not going to change their perspective. Nor is there any residual value in trying to convince them otherwise.



Time would be better spent helping people rather than confusing them with personal attacks and ideological debate.


I happen to agree and that's the point I was trying to make but maybe you can get the point across better... doubt it though...

A healthy debate isn't attacking people every time they disagree with your points but that's what's happening over and over again.

Oh well... it their thread, I will continue to scroll past the majority of posts and find the little case law littered throughout.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #440 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2017, 03:38 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,035
Berner_Faith will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trinton View Post
I think family law is constantly evolving generation by generation and is evolving by case law.

remember this case law I shared?



Father didn't get shared parenting on that interim motion. But a year later, has now won it on a final basis with very valid reasons.



And another order that was made just 4 days ago, for shared parenting



Shared custody is the way of the future, and case law is the evidence.


Thank you for this case law


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 01:41 PM
Velacott's new Bill C-560 (equal parenting) SingingDad Political Issues 16 06-13-2014 03:04 PM
Equal Shared Parenting Mother Divorce & Family Law 56 02-21-2014 04:43 PM
Equal parenting Bill tabled in house of commons SingingDad Divorce & Family Law 1 12-17-2013 08:43 AM
Vellacott celebrates National Child Day with announcement of Equal Parenting bill logicalvelocity Political Issues 7 11-24-2008 06:22 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:03 PM.