Private Member’s Bill C-422 - Equal parenting (Mr. Velacott)

[logicalvelocity]

Originally Posted by EqualParent

The Divorce Act is a federal legislation. Thus the reason for us to write to your local Federal MP to indicate the importance of supporting this bill. However, the provinces will implement the laws through the courts so for sustainable reform, the provinces need to be on board as well... So contacting your local MPP may also be a worthwhile effort.

I'm aware of the Federal Statute. However, as a starting point in Ontario - Apparently the presumption exists under Section 20 of the Children's Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.12 For instance:

...Under the Children’s Law Reform Act, a mother and father are equally entitled to custody of a child. When an access dispute breaks out, judges use a list of criteria to determine whether or not to depart from an equal-access regime.

Judge Ingram ruled that Ms. Johne and Mr. Cavannah’s child would be best served by a 50/50 access arrangement....

http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...tfeeding-6931/

Originally Posted by EqualParent

The online petition is just one of many ways to try to get attention to the Bill. Writing to your MP is also an approach too that should be done as well. What we really need is to start preaching to the non-converted. Starting with your friends and family is a good start. However, my experience so far in getting my friends involve have been abit disappointing so far. I've only email a few friends (to test the water) and it took abit of nagging to get them to even just sign the online petition. What I will be doing is printing out a letter template asking their local MP to support Bill C-422. Then I'll go around and get my friends/family to sign them and I'll mail them on their behalf. Otherwise, most of them likely will just put it off for a more convenient time and then they'll end up forgetting all together.

Many parents who have intact relationships -- Couldn't care less about the cause until their own relationship failed and find themselves on the outside looking in when it comes to their children.

Considering Divorce statistic hovering about 50% - some will be on board soon enough.

[Mess]

Originally Posted by EqualParent

The Divorce Act is a federal legislation. Thus the reason for us to write to your local Federal MP to indicate the importance of supporting this bill. However, the provinces will implement the laws through the courts so for sustainable reform, the provinces need to be on board as well... So contacting your local MPP may also be a worthwhile effort.

Custody is both a federal and provincial jurisdiction due to an odd occurance in the BNA Act. Divorce is specificly a federal responsibility, but civil matters (of which marriage and custody are included) are provincial. The divorce act can't help but affect child custody so there is a rare jurisdictional crossover.

The provinces and feds have tried to deal with this by keeping laws in sync and not contradicting each other. For example the Ontario Family Law Act requires the use of the Federal Child Support tables.

As I understand it (but I could be mistaken or oversimplifying) when we separate only, if we seek custody ruling we go through provincial court and provincial law. If we seek a divorce along with custody, we go through federal court and law. Some provinces also use unified courts.

If the Federal law is changed, the provinces will be strongly obliged to sync up with it. Meanwhile if several provinces went this route, the Feds would be more inclined to sync as well. It can flow either way.

The courts are already favouring shared parenting, compared to a generation ago. The last news article I read in the Toronto Star noted that almost 50% of cases were shared now. There is still a strong bias towards the mothers having custody if the finding is sole custody, this is also close to half, and the smallest percentage is for the fathers to have sole custody.

The court decisions tend to follow previous trends. Lawyers quote other cases, the judges certainly read other judge's decisions and are aware of social studies and statistics. So common law derived from court cases is supporting this trend anyway.

[logicalvelocity]

I believe Yukon Jurisdiction has made some changes to their statutes with respect to the presumption.

On the US side - Arizona and Washington State to name a few.

[EqualParent]

Does that suggest that Ontario judges are encourage to pursue a shared parenting plan first unless one of the parents do not meet the criteria list.... or is the criteria list bias towards mothers and that this presumption is a farce

Originally Posted by logicalvelocity

I'm aware of the Federal Statute. However, as a starting point in Ontario - Apparently the presumption exists under Section 20 of the Children's Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.12 For instance:

Many parents who have intact relationships -- Couldn't care less about the cause until their own relationship failed and find themselves on the outside looking in when it comes to their children.

Considering Divorce statistic hovering about 50% - some will be on board soon enough.

[logicalvelocity]

Originally Posted by EqualParent

Does that suggest that Ontario judges are encourage to pursue a shared parenting plan first unless one of the parents do not meet the criteria list....

To me - it suggests Justice Ingrim of the S.C.J views...as quoted from the media article:

...Under the Children’s Law Reform Act, a mother and father are equally entitled to custody of a child. When an access dispute breaks out, judges use a list of criteria to determine whether or not to depart from an equal-access regime.

Judge Ingram ruled that Ms. Johne and Mr. Cavannah’s child would be best served by a 50/50 access arrangement....

http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...tfeeding-6931/

Originally Posted by EqualParent

or is the criteria list bias towards mothers and that this presumption is a farce

Thats an entirely different subject. Just to clarify - Is the "criteria list" Section 24 of the CLR as enumerated?

[Mess]

If you have a situation with one breadwinner out of the house working and one caregiver who is stay-at-home, then there will be a bias toward giving more custody to the stay-at-home. Essentially this is tracing status quo back to when the marriage was intact. The argument is that the childrens' lives are less disrupted, the working parent has less experience with childcare and has probably been less involved all along.

If that's not true, then the working parent has to show it. The judge wasn't there in the home with them 24/7 and has to go by what seems likely.

The situation right now seems to be, shared parenting where all else was equal, ie both parents were working out of the home. Where one parent was stay-at-home, then from what articles and statistics I've seen, the custody will end up mainly with the stay-at-home.

Is this gender bias or is it role-playing bias?

Now the question, "Should the default be 50/50 shared parenting when the situation during marriage was not 50/50", that is a different question and I don't have an answer for it.

[EqualParent]

Originally Posted by Mess

If you have a situation with one breadwinner out of the house working and one caregiver who is stay-at-home, then there will be a bias toward giving more custody to the stay-at-home. Essentially this is tracing status quo back to when the marriage was intact. The argument is that the childrens' lives are less disrupted, the working parent has less experience with childcare and has probably been less involved all along.

If that's not true, then the working parent has to show it. The judge wasn't there in the home with them 24/7 and has to go by what seems likely.

The situation right now seems to be, shared parenting where all else was equal, ie both parents were working out of the home. Where one parent was stay-at-home, then from what articles and statistics I've seen, the custody will end up mainly with the stay-at-home.

Interesting... Is that the truth behind the statistics we see with mothers receiving the majority of custody awards? The large percentage of them are stay-home moms? If you factor that out, are the outcomes more in favor of shared parenting? Can you point me out a resources you've seen that suggest that... I'd be really interested in seeing those numbers..

[logicalvelocity]

Some specified statistics. Bala et al.

http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/fcy-...cfjs-sjfae.pdf

[LostFather]

Originally Posted by EqualParent

This somewhat saddens me that this particular thread, regarding Bill C-422, has received little attention here online. This Bill represent a potential for great change and bring restore the concept of "equality" in the eyes of the law.

It's depressing to here stories about good parents wanting to be part of their children's lives but are finding no justice in a system that is suppose to treat them equally. What's even more depressing to see the lack of support from many of these dads to work towards making change in our democratic system. If you don't like the rules that you've been force to play with, than work towards changing the rules...

Support Bill C-422 by writing to your MP and encouraging your friends/family to do the same.

Sorry I'm late to get on the train, but I'm here now, and contacting Rob Nicholson as I write this, what else needs to be done? Maybe a march on the Hill. Where is the best place to keep updated?

[LostFather]

Originally Posted by EqualParent

Interesting... Is that the truth behind the statistics we see with mothers receiving the majority of custody awards? The large percentage of them are stay-home moms? If you factor that out, are the outcomes more in favor of shared parenting? Can you point me out a resources you've seen that suggest that... I'd be really interested in seeing those numbers..

I am for any petition, but what about demonstrations, I've thought about putting a sign on myself and walking up and down the courts side walks. What about about marching on Parliament Hill to support this Bill? I would help in anyway possible from my end.

Speaking of Private members bills, what are the chances and has it gone through any readings? What stage? These things tend to die out after the second.