Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sole vs joint

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

  • Sole vs joint

    Just a question I am wondering: is it common for one parent to decide to seek sole custody if there are major problems with communication and effectively co-parenting, agreeing on decisions, etc. Is there any caselaw on this? Is it common for a judge to split decision making for the purposes of reducing conflict? Ie one parent is responsible for education, the other is responsible for health, etc? Is sole custody really only awarded to one parent if the other one is abusive, using drugs/alcohol etc?



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • #2
    Unfortunately this has become a standard tactic for some parents to achieve custody in court. "I need sole.. he/she can't communicate". Judges are catching on to this strategy fast and are putting an end to it.

    I've read so many cases where one parent actually refuses to communicate properly to agitate the other parent, then documents that parents reaction, claiming they can't communicate. Parallel parenting has become extremely popular.

    For example, in cases such as this: https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/do...&resultIndex=1
    [67] In the present case, an order giving Ms. Hoffman sole custody of the children would create a real risk that Mr. Hoffman’s involvement with them would be minimized. Courts have recognized that in such situations, parallel parenting may be the appropriate regime, in spite of the conflict between the parents. As the Court of Appeal for Ontario pointed out in Ursic v. Ursic[16] (2006), a parent cannot be the instigator of high conflict and then argue in favour of sole custody, based on the conflict.
    Also, has www.ourfamilywizard.com been given a go?

    Not to mention, your opinion of bad communication and that of the judges may differ considerably.

    In para 72 of the reference above, the judge states:
    While this requires some measure of communication and cooperation, the court does not apply a standard of perfection. As Quinn, J. remarked in Brook v. Brook, “The cooperation needed is workable, not blissful; adequate, not perfect.”[19]
    Also, remember this:

    A mere statement by one party that there is an inability to communicate will not preclude an order for joint custody.
    Also, in terms of parallel parenting:

    Justice Templeton had held that parallel parenting did not require a cooperative working relationship or even good communication. The objective of parallel parenting was to give the parents equal status, each with distinct rights and responsibilities in relation to specific topics.
    In para. 81 it references caselaw stating stuff like:

    Many trial courts have recognized that joint custody under a parallel parenting regime may be suitable where both parents love the child and should play an active role in the child’s life, yet have difficulty communicating or reaching consensus on the child’s upbringing.
    So you see it's not as easy as you think to run in to a court room saying the OP can't communicate and that you need sole. It get's a heck of a lot more complex than that.
    Last edited by LovingFather32; 08-12-2017, 11:44 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Sole vs joint

      Theres also the difficulty of one parent who feels they know best but in reality only make situations worse. Ange, your ex has shown he is incapable of agreeing and uses it as a tool to spite you. If you have concerns it may be in your best interest to have decision making power for health and schooling.

      ETA: and before you object LF32, I would point out in your case your ex feels she knows best when in reality you are the one making proper decisions like making sure your child gets to school.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by rockscan View Post
        Theres also the difficulty of one parent who feels they know best but in reality only make situations worse. Ange, your ex has shown he is incapable of agreeing and uses it as a tool to spite you. If you have concerns it may be in your best interest to have decision making power for health and schooling.

        ETA: and before you object LF32, I would point out in your case your ex feels she knows best when in reality you are the one making proper decisions like making sure your child gets to school.


        We may have a deal (its close but I am likely getting screwed on the child support) but if it all goes south and I'm looking at court I am considering this. I am so tired of the harassing emails. So tired of I'm going to disagree with everything you say just because.
        If we do reach a deal and write up a new agreement on consent - can I demand that parallel parenting be put into place and our family wizard etc? He doesn't agree to OFW of course because he doesn't want to pay for it; however I think it's imperative in our situation. Is parallel parenting something that only a judge orders you to do?


        Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Ange71727 View Post
          Is parallel parenting something that only a judge orders you to do?
          Pretty much. Think of it this way. If you and your ex could agree enough to determine parallel parenting without a court order, then you do not have the communication deadlocks that make parallel parenting necessary.

          No harm in proposing it, and getting the reaction documented though.

          Comment


          • #6
            OP - Are you asking about access, or custody=decision making? I wonder if you are confusing the terms? Joint, sole, parallel - decision making.
            Start a discussion, not a fire. Post with kindness.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by mcdreamy View Post
              OP - Are you asking about access, or custody=decision making? I wonder if you are confusing the terms? Joint, sole, parallel - decision making.


              I'm asking about decision making (custody). We've mostly agreed on the access now. There are just so many contentious issues when communicating. I get a lambasting via email or text at least once a week. I just want the very minimum in communication with him. It's affecting my well being. There are also differences in our beliefs on health related issues, education and sports as well as many day to day issues. It's my understanding that parallel parenting would mean very limited interaction with day to day decisions being the responsibility of the "on duty" parent.


              Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Ange71727 View Post
                I'm asking about decision making (custody). We've mostly agreed on the access now. There are just so many contentious issues when communicating. I get a lambasting via email or text at least once a week. I just want the very minimum in communication with him. It's affecting my well being. There are also differences in our beliefs on health related issues, education and sports as well as many day to day issues. It's my understanding that parallel parenting would mean very limited interaction with day to day decisions being the responsibility of the "on duty" parent.


                Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
                First, look into Gray Rock method of communicating. It's saved my sanity.

                Second, I put 'by-when' on most of things that require joint communicaiton and there is generally no response on the other end and I end up making the decision. So for our son's birthday, I sent him an idea and date, and he responded with nothing. I followed up two weeks later with 'I haven't heard from you regarding the birthday so if you don't object I will book everything by Friday. Looking forward to seeing you at Lasertag!'
                Spoiler: I booked everything by Friday.

                Does that help?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by ensorcelled View Post
                  First, look into Gray Rock method of communicating. It's saved my sanity.



                  Second, I put 'by-when' on most of things that require joint communicaiton and there is generally no response on the other end and I end up making the decision. So for our son's birthday, I sent him an idea and date, and he responded with nothing. I followed up two weeks later with 'I haven't heard from you regarding the birthday so if you don't object I will book everything by Friday. Looking forward to seeing you at Lasertag!'

                  Spoiler: I booked everything by Friday.



                  Does that help?


                  I'll look into the Gray Rock. I already try to respond minimally but then he will tell me I am not communicating and turn it into "I'm not informing him of things" because I don't send a thousand emails a week.
                  He would be the opposite of your ex - if I said I will book it all by Friday unless you object to something, he would 100% find something to object to and turn it into a huge problem.

                  He used to be exactly like your ex, which is why this is such an issue now. He has realized he screwed up by allowing a certain status quo for the way things are done and having me take care of most kid related things for years. The Birthday example you raise is actually a pertinent one ironically. My kids come to me to plan/book/organize birthdays every year. It's just a given. He has never wanted to take the reins on that and I happily do it. This year when I informed him of what his son would be doing (at son's request) he flipped out and told me I was making unilateral decisions (even though this was his son's own request). I even invited him even though the last party he came to was 6 years ago. It's "known" that I do the classmates party and he does his own thing with family; however it was a big deal this year (with pending court case) that I didn't consult. I offered for us to alternate each year since this now mattered to him and he said he didn't want it to be so "formulaic" which is really code for "I don't want to actually plan and pay for the party, I just want to complain about you doing it".



                  Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I actually think all the emails from him is about controlling me. If I don't respond in 2 days or so I'll get another one saying "you need to respond". It's like his little way of making me do something he knows I don't want to do.


                    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      OH, the 'She's so CONTROLLING' trope is alive and well. It's thrown around a lot on this board as well. We can go into detail on other tropes but I would just send him a message that says, 'Joe wants to do XYZ for his birthday. I don't have any evidence that you were planning anything or had asked him about his preferences. If I don't hear from you by Friday I am booking the party and extending invites. If you can, it would be wonderful if you can pick up a cake at Costco. Let me know by Oct 1 if this is possible. You, your family and ))) are welcome to join and I know Joe and his friends will have a great time.'

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        He may also be doing this just to continue his disruptive behaviour through the decisions. What he fails to realize is that judges/mediators see this every day.

                        When he sends you these emails/texts you can do one of two things:

                        1. Ignore the "noise" and respond only to the relevant parts in as little words as possible.

                        2. Respond by pointing out the disrespectful behaviour and request he resend his communication with the irrelevant info taken out. For instance: thank you for this email however I will not entertain any disrespectful comments or statements that are not pertinent to the children. Please resend your request with the unnecessary abuse taken out.

                        You could also pay the extra for OFW and then live free of his bs. You cant fix stupid though. We read through the ridiculous crap my partners ex states. Her last brief was full of ridiculous accusations against my partner and his lawyer agreed with me that it was simply "noise".

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by rockscan View Post
                          ETA: and before you object LF32, I would point out in your case your ex feels she knows best when in reality you are the one making proper decisions like making sure your child gets to school.
                          Agreed. In my experience (and many I've read), there's this gender stereotype when parents separate which depicts a caveman male who can not change a diaper, cook a meal or be on time for school. Unfortunately, many mothers are so blinded by these highly subjective gender stereotypes that they can't fathom that their ex "man" could ever possibly take care of a child on their own without master mom's presence. This is 99% why separated couples dont go 50/50. (whether right away or later). One parent wants to make the other fight for equal access to their offspring in court ... like Ange.

                          You're correct Rock, my ex now "KNOWS" I make good decisions and I've greatly exceeded her blurred vision of my parenting capabilities. Me not just caveman .. me can parent too! If other mom's followed suit (like my ex) and try out 50/50, more situations would end up like mine (give or take .. I know not all situations are the same and that 50/50 isn't for everyone .. but I bet it's for most). My point is .. you can't say you dont like bananas if you have never tried them. You may end up LOVING them.

                          If more parents stepped out of the damn warzone for a month and gave 50/50 a shot, more parents would discover what my ex did .. that it works so great and so much stress and background noise gets erased. So good for the kids. I wish more ppl would take off the warpaint and try it .. they'd be pleasantly surprised.

                          It took a 50/50 relationship for my ex to finally realize that I'm a very good parent.

                          Moving closer to your kids school, having a great family until waiting for him, etc ... isn't disruptive behavior in my books. Ange makes him sound evil. I see past her writing unfortunately. He's not evil .. he just wants an opportunity to be a good, involved dad. It's not all about money .. the guy paid all his back CS. Does he have to be Ange's best friend? Noooo .. and he doesn't have to be. All this talk about bad communication.... has she sent him OFW yet? No? Why?

                          For me, the most evil act in the world is denying access to a child that has half your genetics. Even if you have an agreement for say EOW and midweek access, if you've been there forf years and feel that more access would benefit the kids and the family ... why not? Acces should not be denied when there' no good reason for denying it ... which is why this particular case has turned my stomach.

                          This isn't a hardened criminal just getting out of prison for manslaughter. This is a loving father who's already there almost 50%. The problem here is that Angie is still pissed about her past relationship with him and simply doesn't get a long with him .. starting thread after thread asking how to disallow him more access to his kids. He's a DAD....he's already in their life a lot ... stop denying him more access .. geez. lol

                          I know what the problem seems to be here ... but we'll leave it at that before a mob of mom's attack me (DUCK). lol
                          Last edited by LovingFather32; 08-16-2017, 12:11 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Ange71727 View Post
                            I am so tired of the harassing emails.
                            We have given you a healthy array of advice regarding this. Have you taken it? Harassment? Have you gotten a restraining order?

                            If we do reach a deal and write up a new agreement on consent - can I demand that parallel parenting be put into place and our family wizard etc?
                            Don't "DEMAND" anything (poor choice of words) .. yikes.

                            What you do is make an offer with that. Make a list of why/how it will benefit the kids in the end. I'd make up a draft order (I was a boy scout in court) .. and have the judge order all that anyways. (OFW, etc)

                            So is the agreement that you're about to accept 50/50 by chance?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post


                              For me, the most evil act in the world is denying access to a child that has half your genetics. Even if you have an agreement for say EOW and midweek access, if you've been there forf years and feel that more access would benefit the kids and the family ... why not? Acces should not be denied when there' no good reason for denying it ... which is why this particular case has turned my stomach.

                              This isn't a hardened criminal just getting out of prison for manslaughter. This is a loving father who's already there almost 50%. The problem here is that Angie is still pissed about her past relationship with him and simply doesn't get a long with him .. starting thread after thread asking how to disallow him more access to his kids. He's a DAD....he's already in their life a lot ... stop denying him more access .. geez. lol

                              I know what the problem seems to be here ... but we'll leave it at that before a mob of mom's attack me (DUCK). lol
                              Just because you scrambled your DNA with someone, doesn't entitle you (or them) to anything. Much less your all-or-nothing 50%

                              Just because someone isn't Paul Bernardo, doesn't mean they should be denied it either. There are many, many configurations of parenting plans and no family is similar to the other in which one is best for them.

                              FWIW, shared parenting is defined as minimum of 35% access:Definition of Equally Shared Parenting ? Leading Women for Shared Parenting

                              (and yes, I'm a member of Leading Women for Shared Parenting although the title is a bit weird- I'm not a leader in anything! We are currently looking to open a Canadian chapter- if interested).

                              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