Interesting Article on Joint Custody

[Decent Dad]

I do agree that a vindictive parent will do whatever it takes to turn the screws on the other parent. And also poison the children and paretning relationships.

What if in your use case above, when parent X (Joyce) goes to her lawyer., would the lawyer not state: you had better give shared parenting because the law is shared parenting. Right now you are withholding the children. This will not make you look good in court. As well, by doing so, if you litigate, you have a good chance of losing ans you will owe costs and could lose YOUR custody. Right now you have broken the law...

... or something like that.

Also since it is John's right and the law to 50-50 he would not have the same kind of intimadation that occurs right now. He could simply offer 3 or 4 schedules. If she can't decide, he would decide for her. He can pick them up from daycare or school.

Yes, that is kind of goofy to have to race to get the kids, but at least the law is on his side... not the other way around.

I seriously do not get what is so hard with joint custody and access. I mean really, how many decisions during a day does one parent make that really needs both parents decisions? Or is so mission critical that it can't wait for an e-mail or phone call. Even if you were a NCP and your kid was with you and wanted a tatoo, nothing is going to stop you from giving them a ride and the cash if you want to. There already is the persumption that you are both parents making day-to-day decisions - just that one only makes them 4 days out of 30. Things like schools and daycares are more complicated, but that can be resolved over some time (and yes, may require legal assistance).

My ex is absolutely for sabotaging joint custody and access. For the most part I can ignore her. If push comes to shove, and we end up in court over custody (again), I for sure could lose. It would certainly take her edge off if the default was joint custody and she could lose big $$'s taking me to court every 6 months.

[Divorcemanagement]

Hi Decent Dad, you wrote:

What if in your use case above, when parent X (Joyce) goes to her lawyer., would the lawyer not state: you had better give shared parenting because the law is shared parenting. Right now you are withholding the children. This will not make you look good in court. As well, by doing so, if you litigate, you have a good chance of losing ans you will owe costs and could lose YOUR custody. Right now you have broken the law...

That depends what the law says. If a federal law saying shared parenting is mandatory were to exist, then it would have to have a built in mechanism which defines what shared parenting actually looks like. That mechanism would have to be in concert with Provincial laws governing how courts in each province would look at the issue as well

Because of this, I can't see a rebuttable presumption of shared parenting working unless those mechanisms existed. Finally, were those mechanisms to exist, it still won't change a case where a parent is intent on obtaining sole custody or primary care - there would still be a race to the court house at the onset of a separation to challenge a shared parenting law.

Now if we assumed that the parent who doesn't want shared parenting decided against going to court at the onset of a divorce and they still wanted to get sole custody, we would likely have a "reverse status quo" situation.

Right now the status quo favours the parent who has the children living with them the majority of the time. In a reverse status quo scenario, the parents would be living equally in both homes and the parent who sole custody would build their case to get it by emphasizing the exact same themes that exist in current litigation:

- my ex is controlling
- my ex wants to avoid child support
- there is too much conflict

As I said earlier, litigation occurs either way when someone is hell-bent on achieving a goal that they believe is best.

As LV pointed our, parallel parenting is an option that would uphold an equal time share arrangement, but parallel parenting is basically this:

"Mom gets the kids one week, dad gets the kids the other week. During periods of time that the kids are in mom's care, she is the primary caregiver. During the week when they are in dad's care, he is the primary caregiver".

Interestingly, parallel parenting can also be a recipe for future litigation because while it emphasizes an equal time share arrangement, it also eliminates actual collaborative parenting which we all agree benefits children. It is when there is no communication in a parallel parenting regime that HUGE conflict emerges and very often both parties are back in court changing it.

This is why I would prefer a family law system that didn't focus on "who gets the kids on what date" but rather, promotes collaboration by giving parents the tools to make whatever parenting arrangement they come up with work. For example, if you get an agreement on every single conflict issue between two parents to their mutual satisfaction and that agreement provides mechanisms to make a parenting arrangement functional, in other words, "the rules", then shared parenting probably could work in the majority of the cases. There will always be parents who want sole custody at all costs. Those parents should be asked in court the following question:

"If the court rules against you and says that your former spouse can have sole custody, would you be agreeable to shared parenting?"

[SilverLining]

to Divorce Managment: I completely agree. Counselling and then mediation should be used to allow the parents to come to an agreement that they are both comfortable with. The focus should be on obtaining legislation that supports more social programs rather than presuming legislation would bring less conflict.
well put.

[passionatedad]

There was a "For the sake of the Children" report done in the 90's that basically stated that if our laws in Canada didn't change in regards to custody, access, support, then there was to be great problems in the future.
Thus today's problems.

This report is what.....15 years old.. and still carry's weight when introduced into trial books of authorities.

It is definately a interesting read, and a good push for your MP's to possibly have yet another joint report on today's issues of divorce and the laws.

Many states, and countries are vastly changing their divorce laws, yet Canada seems to be lacking in this area. Some centers in Canada are "more favourable" to fairness then other centers from my understanding.