Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Maximum Contact Principle: An Important Consideration

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Good for you guys. Give yourselves high fives. Another LF32 thread demolished. YeeHaa.

    The important thing to note posters is that my intensions of this thread can be seen at the beginning of the thread. You can mock me, edit/delete/redirect my posts all you want. As long as I'm able to provide some good case law and a deeper comprehension of maximum contact then I've done my job here.

    :/
    Last edited by LovingFather32; 11-24-2014, 10:34 PM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
      Good for you guys. Give yourselves high fives. Another LF32 thread demolished. YeeHaa.
      oh come on stop being so juvenile. You posted about the mods on this thread, people comment on your posts. There was no motives to "demolish" your thread. You did that yourself. You seem to feel that you have no accountability. You are the one who took the thread in another direction first.

      Comment


      • #18
        So I inderstand the " Maximum Contact". Concept. But can it be used if one parent only wants to arrange to see their child (3 yrs old) 4 times per year and then thinks its okay to have long visits. 2 weeks etc.?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Beachnana View Post
          So I inderstand the " Maximum Contact". Concept. But can it be used if one parent only wants to arrange to see their child (3 yrs old) 4 times per year and then thinks its okay to have long visits. 2 weeks etc.?
          SOTS..name calling. Not cool. Please stop.

          Thank you Beach. God I could hug you. Back on a related topic. Great question at that. I would think that perhaps that's not the best idea. The child would have to get use to that parent again in short bursts (especially at 3). That would be a case where one parent doesn't desire maximum contact so the rule wouldn't apply.

          I like this definition:

          The “maximum contact principle” essentially advocates that the child should have as much contact as possible with each parent if it benefits the child. Therefore, Judges will investigate into whether the either parent has fully complied with the principle or has placed various bulwarks that hinder the relationship of the child with the other parent.

          The principle is codified in section 16(10) of the Divorce Act, and although there is no comparable section in the Children’s Law Reform Act, courts also apply this principle under the CLRA.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Beachnana View Post
            So I inderstand the " Maximum Contact". Concept. But can it be used if one parent only wants to arrange to see their child (3 yrs old) 4 times per year and then thinks its okay to have long visits. 2 weeks etc.?
            I think that the idea of maximum contact is that the wishes of competent parents who want to be parents, is honoured.

            Every time I see someone arguing against maximum contact, they drudge up examples of substandard fathers that are either abusive, or fail to exercise their time.

            If a dad (or mom) wants to be a parent, and is competent, and have 50%, why, for the love of all that is holy and good, should they be denied that?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Straittohell View Post
              I think that the idea of maximum contact is that the wishes of competent parents who want to be parents, is honoured.

              Every time I see someone arguing against maximum contact, they drudge up examples of substandard fathers that are either abusive, or fail to exercise their time.

              If a dad (or mom) wants to be a parent, and is competent, and have 50%, why, for the love of all that is holy and good, should they be denied that?
              It isn't just mothers that do it, its custodial fathers also. Bad behaviour isn't restricted by gender.

              In a perfect world 50% when there are no other factors would be a given. Unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world. Will it ever change? Not in my lifetime I think but it will happen eventually.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by standing on the sidelines View Post
                It isn't just mothers that do it, its custodial fathers also. Bad behaviour isn't restricted by gender.

                In a perfect world 50% when there are no other factors would be a given. Unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world. Will it ever change? Not in my lifetime I think but it will happen eventually.
                You're right, it isn't, but in my personal life, in the news, and on this site, the vast majority of gatekeeping behaviours have been displayed by mothers.

                If there are any stats to refute by anecdotal observations, I would love to see it.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Straittohell View Post
                  You're right, it isn't, but in my personal life, in the news, and on this site, the vast majority of gatekeeping behaviours have been displayed by mothers.

                  If there are any stats to refute by anecdotal observations, I would love to see it.
                  It because mothers have the power to do it - "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely".

                  I am sure men would do the same thing, men and women are pretty much the same its just context mostly that makes them different.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Straittohell View Post
                    If there are any stats to refute by anecdotal observations, I would love to see it.
                    Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

                    To your point though there is a lack of relevant data to draw any sort of solid statistics on. This is because the court system doesn't track the data and anything out of view of the court would be difficult to collect data on. It leaves everything to speculation.

                    Good Luck!
                    Tayken

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Tayken View Post
                      Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

                      To your point though there is a lack of relevant data to draw any sort of solid statistics on. This is because the court system doesn't track the data and anything out of view of the court would be difficult to collect data on. It leaves everything to speculation.

                      Good Luck!
                      Tayken
                      Oh, I know it isn't tracked. The courts and government don't want to believe the problem exists, so they're not about to go and gather statistics that prove them wrong. That was pretty much my point by offering anyone the chance to rebut my anecdotal observations with something a bit more scientific. It doesn't exist.

                      Clever wiki hyperlinks and comments about speculation aside, I'm astounded that with how much people try to pretend that this problem doesn't exist. Yes, all that I have are my observations from news, personal life, and this forum, cases on canlii. However, in all of those sources, there are very few cases of father's having sole custody, and even fewer cases of sole custody dads acting as gatekeepers.

                      I keep seeing this attitude creep into both the 'real world' and this forum that seems to say "it's sexist to accuse women of this kind of behaviour when men are just as capable", but the true issue has nothing to do with 'capability', it has to do with opportunity and frequency.

                      Let me give you two scenarios:

                      1) Husband comes home and finds wife in bed with best friend. Enraged, husband removes children from home, and denies wife any access. Wife calls the police. What happens next?

                      2) Wife comes home and finds husband in bed with best friend. Enraged, wife removes children from home, and denies husband any access. Husband calls the police. What happens next?


                      Can you honestly tell me that they will have the same outcomes?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        How did this thread go from an access thread to a father's right thread?

                        Gender has nothing to do with bad parenting/ access denials/ bad conduct.

                        Gatekeepers come in every sex, size, color, shape, and form.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by wantmyfreedom View Post
                          How did this thread go from an access thread to a father's right thread?

                          Gender has nothing to do with bad parenting/ access denials/ bad conduct.

                          Gatekeepers come in every sex, size, color, shape, and form.

                          Beats me. If I were a mod, I would suggest moving this thread to "Political Issues".

                          Oh wait, it already is.

                          "Gatekeepers come in every sex, size, color, shape, and form"

                          Yes, you keep saying that, and I keep agreeing. I keep saying that mother's seem to do it a lot more, and are able to get away with a lot more, and you keep failing to respond to that aspect of my post.

                          Why is this important? The fact that one gender is disenfranchised in the system means that the system is broken. The first step to fixing a problem is acknowledging it's existence.

                          HammerDad and Mother touched on this in other threads, by stating that 50/50 needs to be enshrined as a proper default. I would argue that is entirely correct, and also needs to be mandatory police enforceable.

                          Feel free to launch into the 'what if the other parent is abusive/negligent' argument, because I know you will, and I'll simply respond that those should be the exceptions to the rule. Right now, the practical default is that if the mom wants to take sole access, she can, and the dad then has to fight to get it back. That's reality.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I completely disagree. It can go either way....
                            I'm not here to convince you otherwise.
                            I think the courts are fair. Parents regardless of gender are judged by the choices they make regarding their children.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by wantmyfreedom View Post
                              I completely disagree. It can go either way....
                              I'm not here to convince you otherwise.
                              I think the courts are fair. Parents regardless of gender are judged by the choices they make regarding their children.
                              This is why I canceled my subscription to cable. Why stay up late to watch SNL when I can be amused by statement like this for free?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Now you have an internet bill.

                                Comment

                                Our Divorce Forums
                                Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                                Working...
                                X