While the Supreme Courts have made a ruling that Mobility should not be a consideration when determining custody and access, these types of cases are more and more becoming routine, and landing families in court more and more, and probably a common reason why courts become backlogged.
The laws state that: "when a parent moves a reasonable distance as so to disrupt the life of the child." What does this statement mean? It is so open ended.
So what is a resonable distance? While it is true that all parents have 50/50 this 50 % threshold defines what I like to call "legal custody" In the United States our Custody is defined as Joint Legal and or Joint Physical, or Sole Legal Custody or Sole Physical Custody. There is nobody that can really take away "legal custody" of your child unless you are deemed unfit to parent.
So now we have a different definiton of the various types of Custody, on to access. No parent has the right to be denied access to their child but what is reasonable when one parent moves 50km or more? Is it fair to make the NCP pick up the tab when it was not their choice to move away from the child's home? I say child's home when I refer to their habitual residence, the home they grew up in since birth, the home in which they attend schoo, where their doctors are and extended family.
In the United States there are rules defining this "distance" it varies from state to state and city to city as it does here from province to province and municipality to municipality.
On a personal note my Divorce from Michigan actually sated that I was not allowed to relocate more than 100 miles (161km) and retain Joint Legal Custody; without the permission of the courts and or my former spouse. This is not a stipulation for "Phsical Custody" this is for me to have a say in my kids life. Now I live 183 miles (294km) and because I have the courts permission still retain my " Joint Legal Custody". I will tell you this the terms itsself in a court of law is a term only its like having a Queen or King as a figurehead with no authority. While it is Court Ordered that I have legal custody, my ex does not excercise it at all, sure I can complain but the courts will say I moved, and the resoning of my move has no bearing on anyhting.
As for Access I get my children once a month for a weekend, every other holiday and half the summer.
I ask you all to define what is a reasonable distance toensure a healthy, normal, stable life for our children?
The laws state that: "when a parent moves a reasonable distance as so to disrupt the life of the child." What does this statement mean? It is so open ended.
So what is a resonable distance? While it is true that all parents have 50/50 this 50 % threshold defines what I like to call "legal custody" In the United States our Custody is defined as Joint Legal and or Joint Physical, or Sole Legal Custody or Sole Physical Custody. There is nobody that can really take away "legal custody" of your child unless you are deemed unfit to parent.
So now we have a different definiton of the various types of Custody, on to access. No parent has the right to be denied access to their child but what is reasonable when one parent moves 50km or more? Is it fair to make the NCP pick up the tab when it was not their choice to move away from the child's home? I say child's home when I refer to their habitual residence, the home they grew up in since birth, the home in which they attend schoo, where their doctors are and extended family.
In the United States there are rules defining this "distance" it varies from state to state and city to city as it does here from province to province and municipality to municipality.
On a personal note my Divorce from Michigan actually sated that I was not allowed to relocate more than 100 miles (161km) and retain Joint Legal Custody; without the permission of the courts and or my former spouse. This is not a stipulation for "Phsical Custody" this is for me to have a say in my kids life. Now I live 183 miles (294km) and because I have the courts permission still retain my " Joint Legal Custody". I will tell you this the terms itsself in a court of law is a term only its like having a Queen or King as a figurehead with no authority. While it is Court Ordered that I have legal custody, my ex does not excercise it at all, sure I can complain but the courts will say I moved, and the resoning of my move has no bearing on anyhting.
As for Access I get my children once a month for a weekend, every other holiday and half the summer.
I ask you all to define what is a reasonable distance toensure a healthy, normal, stable life for our children?
Comment