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
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2014, 11:31 AM
Janibel's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Way up North
Posts: 1,497
Janibel will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rioe View Post
Don't we already have that now? Nothing in that brief article suggests a better way to do it. To overhaul financial disclosure, for example, a court would have to make it a regular thing to order financial institutions and employers to do disclosure directly, if a litigant is refusing or delaying. How hard can it be to order a credit check, which would reveal a whole lot more than some exes do?

I would love to see the child custody default be 50-50 though, and if one parent wanted otherwise, they would have to prove it was in the children's best interests. Child support should also be more of a sliding scale (both parents contribute their table amounts, and receive a portion back proportional to their access, scaling every 10% or something) so that there wasn't a crazy jump to be fought over at the 40% mark.

ETA: Further thoughts

I suppose it could be very helpful to have costs done at each step of the way, and not all at the end once a winner/loser have been determined. We came together today to deal with this matter, however party B has still not provided the disclosure required? Today's costs are payable immediately to the party that came prepared.
That's the way to speed things up - immediate financial consequences to the unprepared/uncooperative party. Why wait until the end of the process (years) when they can claim bankruptcy or undue hardship caused by their own lack of common sense.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2014, 11:54 AM
FB_ FB_ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,407
FB_ will become famous soon enough
Default

Here's the actual report that was written by Action Committee on Access to Justice in Civil and Family Matters


http://www.cfcj-fcjc.org/sites/defau...lish_Final.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2014, 11:54 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,151
MS Mom is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by arabian View Post
All things are not about "paying" [although this may ring true in your own personal situation].

FWB - your comments lead me to believe that you are disillusioned with Canada. Perhaps you should go back to your country of origin or to a more "civilized" country? I'm quite proud to be Canadian and believe Canada is, indeed, quite civilized and a great place to live.

Hear hear Arabian. Not everything is about paying.

Why can I be charged with contempt for "witholding access" (access right of the child and all that), but the access parent can jump ship and abandon the child with zero legal consequence regarding access?

Where's the fairness in that? He can do what he wants (depsite a court order), but I can not because of a court order.

Seriously - what's with that aspect of Canadian Family Law? Access parents are only supposed to be financially responsible for their kids? No other responsibilities attributed to them?
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2014, 12:02 PM
Rioe's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,216
Rioe will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by arabian View Post
I think your idea of costs is an excellent one Rioe. By doing that the legal costs might be more accurately weighed by the client.
The more I think about it, the more I believe I may have stumbled across a useful idea.

It would be far more effective if costs came regularly in small increments as a result of clear causes, instead of at some theoretical end point nobody believes they will ever reach because they don't think they'll lose. Or if someone doesn't understand costs in the first place, the first instance will make it clear, and they might smarten up instead of going through a lengthy trial first.

Would costs along the way have helped anybody's cases here?
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2014, 12:04 PM
FWB's Avatar
FWB FWB is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 548
FWB is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Seriously - what's with that aspect of Canadian Family Law? Access parents are only supposed to be financially responsible for their kids? No other responsibilities attributed to them?
Curious to find out the response to that one, that is not out to lunch
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2014, 12:16 PM
Rioe's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,216
Rioe will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MS Mom View Post
Seriously - what's with that aspect of Canadian Family Law? Access parents are only supposed to be financially responsible for their kids? No other responsibilities attributed to them?
Forcing an actively disinterested parent (not saying only men here) to be a parent can be more detrimental to a child than it is beneficial.

However, someone can only be charged with child abandonment if the child is physically endangered. 218. Abandoning child | Criminal Code of Canada Permanently leaving a child in the care of the other parent doesn't qualify, no matter how emotionally cruel it may be.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2014, 12:21 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,151
MS Mom is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rioe View Post
The more I think about it, the more I believe I may have stumbled across a useful idea.

It would be far more effective if costs came regularly in small increments as a result of clear causes, instead of at some theoretical end point nobody believes they will ever reach because they don't think they'll lose. Or if someone doesn't understand costs in the first place, the first instance will make it clear, and they might smarten up instead of going through a lengthy trial first.

Would costs along the way have helped anybody's cases here?
Rioe - I'm a little confused. I was sure the rules said that costs need to be determined at each step.

Or, are you meaning - each appearance?? If so, yes, for sure. Costs awards against the ex throughout the process would not only speed it up, it would cut out the BS along the way and significantly impact my costs (just by speeding up the process).

At my last case conference, the judge didn't bat an eye at:

-lack of financial disclosure - despite being in the process for 5 months.
-falsely attested documentation that was worthless for my purposes
-the fact that the 3 previous agreements have not been followed by the respondent
-significant typographical errors on the documentation submitted (ie like putting his income as 1.79 million and overstating the age of the child by two years).

A prepared opposing lawyer would go miles towards solution. The lawyer actually said "This is where I lack some of the benefit of others judge as I have no small children"........and then went on to talk about UCCB which hasn't been applicable in my case for almost 6 years. The judge told him he should know this as "he represents people with small children", but his idiocy wasn't otherwise mentioned.
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2014, 12:27 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,151
MS Mom is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rioe View Post
Forcing an actively disinterested parent (not saying only men here) to be a parent can be more detrimental to a child than it is beneficial.

However, someone can only be charged with child abandonment if the child is physically endangered. 218. Abandoning child | Criminal Code of Canada Permanently leaving a child in the care of the other parent doesn't qualify, no matter how emotionally cruel it may be.

I understand what you're saying, I really do. But, emotional cruelty can be punishable to the custodial parent (contempt - witholding access). How is not showing up not the same emotional cruelty punishable in the same manner? To me, this condones emotional cruelty and does NOTHING to stop an otherwise dissinterested parent lobbying the court for access time (to get the 40% threshold) and yet have no intention of using that access time?

I know others believe that the CP has all the power and holds the strings, but from this CP's perspective - I have no power at all. I have a joint custody agreement and a parent that chose to abandon. Yet, it's up to me to make the situation right as far as agreements and custody is concerned. He just ups and leaves and delays every court process along the way.

And, you're right - they aren't all men. But, in my case, it is a man.
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2014, 01:11 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 154
Gilligan is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MS Mom View Post
I understand what you're saying, I really do. But, emotional cruelty can be punishable to the custodial parent (contempt - witholding access). How is not showing up not the same emotional cruelty punishable in the same manner? To me, this condones emotional cruelty and does NOTHING to stop an otherwise dissinterested parent lobbying the court for access time (to get the 40% threshold) and yet have no intention of using that access time?

I know others believe that the CP has all the power and holds the strings, but from this CP's perspective - I have no power at all. I have a joint custody agreement and a parent that chose to abandon. Yet, it's up to me to make the situation right as far as agreements and custody is concerned. He just ups and leaves and delays every court process along the way.

And, you're right - they aren't all men. But, in my case, it is a man.
I think you make a very good point here, but being the CP somewhat imparts the responsibility of making the right choices, despite it not being fair to you (as the CP) or the children. I supposed that it is the very reason that you are the CP and the other party is not.

I think it is a terrible thing, but there seems to be no penalty for NCP, as it seems that their only requirements in the courts is financial support.
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 01-21-2014, 01:17 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,769
dad2bandm is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MS Mom View Post
...
I know others believe that the CP has all the power and holds the strings, but from this CP's perspective - I have no power at all. I have a joint custody...
That thought likely comes from people who do not share joint custody. In your case, you do "share" custody, even if it does not seem to be working well for you.
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
Debt at time of marriage - good or bad? goosie77 Financial Issues 9 02-13-2013 09:10 AM
Canadians For Family Law Reform (CFFLR) Ace Political Issues 18 12-20-2012 11:22 PM
press release: Ontario's Family Responsibility office Peggy Parenting Issues 8 10-22-2010 10:20 AM
Infant Access and Breastfeeding quake Parenting Issues 31 02-01-2006 05:35 PM
Ontario law must apply in Family Arbitrations lammie Divorce & Family Law 0 11-20-2005 09:29 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:41 AM.