Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

50/50 Equal Parenting: The Debate

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

  • Thanks for keeping the thread on topic, arabian.

    A reminder that this thread is to discuss 50-50, not to speculate about the status of a poster.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by shirley1011 View Post
      Arabian I hope indeed it is temporary. I understand there are always two sides but when you are dealing with a "gatekeeper" it is sometimes hard to believe that some mothers can be reasonable.

      For those of us with the "gatekeeper" threads like this one offer so much hope from other posters that the court system is changing and so much insight into how to deal with the system.

      LF tried a couple of time to get the thread back on track but only to be derailed again and again. The thread is 50/50 which there aren't many moms on here giving a thumbs up! I agree there are many good moms out there but for those of us fighting for even an extra hour all this information is priceless.

      I think that it is important to have a good balance of opinions for issues such as this.

      "Gatekeeper" is a term which is tossed around too generally IMO. If I were raising children and my ex was a male slut and/or lived an immoral lifestyle I would indeed become super vigilant and do everything I could to ensure my children were not exposed to a sleazy lifestyle. If, on the other hand, my ex could convince me that our children would be raised in accordance to our previously-decided-upon values and morals I would be very supportive of equal parenting. Too often I think many people fall short in showing the other parent that they have a sincere desire and ability to raise the children appropriately. If someone couldn't convince me of this then I would certainly be cautious and try to keep the children with me. Is that so wrong?

      People change (some improve but often others do not). I think too often when people separate they jump to legal process because they cannot find a way in which to communicate with each other. Civility is lost. We all know that if two people cannot get along then their chances of effective co-parenting are pretty small. Judges know this and make their rulings accordingly. So.... the next time someone jumps the gun and lawyers up before trying to work out an arrangement with the ex they should think about this.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by arabian View Post
        I found this article (2014) to be interesting. Note the comments at the end of the article.

        Something that struck me was the tax implications. I often wondered why payor of child support doesn't get a tax break.

        Focus: Equal shared parenting bill defeated
        Money always becomes an important factor in divorce. Anyone who declares "money is not a factor in my fight" is fooling themselves.

        Another reason this bill would have been a nightmare and likely failed is the fact it seeks to have a retroactive effect on all settled agreements. Can you imagine the chaos in,the court system should this bill come to law? If as many say the system is biased and the majority of custody falls to the Mothers then the majority of Fathers would be heading to court to have,their biased unfair SA overturned.

        Perhaps,the bill tried to do too much. It should have kept to the main issue 50/50 presumption. Which, by the way, I hear in Australia it is not working out too well.

        If CRA made the tax change and make CS taxable and tax deductible. It would be interesting to see how this changes the situation.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by arabian View Post
          I found this article (2014) to be interesting. Note the comments at the end of the article.

          Something that struck me was the tax implications. I often wondered why payor of child support doesn't get a tax break.

          Focus: Equal shared parenting bill defeated
          Check out the comments at the bottom of the article. There is an interesting debate as to why. Some suggest it is a "tax grab" by the government. It was only in 1997 that things changed.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Beachnana View Post
            Money always becomes an important factor in divorce. Anyone who declares "money is not a factor in my fight" is fooling themselves.


            If CRA made the tax change and make CS taxable and tax deductible. It would be interesting to see how this changes the situation.
            I think it would make a notable difference.

            I would like to see some articles about what is happening in Australia.

            There are a myriad of reasons why presumed 50/50 at time of separation is and isn't a good thing. In theory it sounds all warm and fuzzy. However, what happens if the reason for separation is due to behavior of one parent? How does that factor into things? Ages of children is another matter as "views of the children" are supposed to be important. However, to bring children's views into things it opens up the door for parents to use children as pawns and might further thrust children right in the middle of adult's dispute.

            I believe that the 50/50 theory is worth looking at if, all things considered, both parents are on equal footing. How is that accomplished? Consideration for 50/50 to be given after a period of time from separation?

            Even though I would most certainly be a nightmare gatekeeper if I felt my children were not in a good place when with their father, I would hope that the father would take steps to dispel my concerns and make overtures to work with me so that he would get my blessing on parenting our children.

            Perhaps one has to take a look at the common belief that "what goes on at mom/dad's home is no concern of the other parent"? Does anyone really believe that? For example, if my children are being told frequently that I am the devil incarnate then I would certainly make that my business. I take this position, of course, as it relates to both men and women.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by arabian View Post
              There are a myriad of reasons why presumed 50/50 at time of separation is and isn't a good thing.
              No one has questioned if it is "necessary". If you go through my threads you will find very well referenced case law on the subject matter. The courts order joint and 50-50 residency quite often.

              There are two way things change... In legislation and in jurisprudence. The jurisprudence has spoken quite loudly in favour of 50-50 and even placed excellent solutions for parents to consider: parallel parenting.

              The bar has raised very high for people seeking to oppose joint custody and equal residency. So high that it many people simply agree to it.

              Changes it legislation would only impact the 1% of cases that go to trial. When our government makes a legislative change they need to consider a wider impact than the 1% that go to trial. Of the 1% a smaller % of cases may actually be related to 50-50 residency...

              When things become common in jurisprudence (as they have become) they don't often require legislative change to become "official". Many people don't understand the system of case law and why cases like WD's are monumental to the changes in family law. When a case has 30+ references like his it becomes almost a "defacto" law. When they start getting referenced as "tests" then they really become relevant.

              Originally posted by arabian View Post
              In theory it sounds all warm and fuzzy. However, what happens if the reason for separation is due to behavior of one parent? How does that factor into things?
              I am of the humble opinion that those matters that require court attention would still end up in court even if 50-50 residency was outlined in our legislation. Why? Because there is always going to be the exception to the rule and high conflict parents will always have an "exception" that needs to be dealt with in the courts.

              The issue isn't "legislation" but, the fact that 1% of the population requires court intervention to resolve a matter no matter how strong legislation is. Parents will fight over kids. Parents have always fought over kids and it is even documented in the bible. If Solomon had to deal with this nonsense what makes us think that we are not going to have to deal with parental conflict in 2017?

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_of_Solomon

              What is more important is improving legislation to resolve conflicts FASTER in our legal system. We need to get the problems of the 1% resolved faster as they are consuming 99% of our resources!

              A presumption of 50-50 wouldn't change this 1% to 99% issue. It won't go away. Parents who fight will still make the claims of "abuse" and all the other "stuff" to try and "win" in court.

              For example, we still deal with the nutjobs who come to court with all the fake legal claims of Roman law and fun stuff. This is jamming the Alberta courts on a consistent basis. (Known as OPCA.)

              CanLII Connecte - What are OPCA Litigants?

              1% of the population will always fight over something... We just need to insure that they don't eat up 99% of the resources while doing it.

              I don't see any way in the current offerings of legislative change for 50-50 residency that would end the conflict. It just puts in a framework for conflict and how to engage in. If someone were to propose legislation that reduces the cost of conflict then I would be all ears.

              Good Luck!
              Tayken

              Comment


              • I still can't believe they banned LF32. He drives all this traffic to this site and they just ban him. I don't see anything that he did wrong. If you are going to come to a 50/50 equal parenting debate conversation and share your story as to why you are opposing 50/50, then you are volunteering your case and situation as one to be studied, as part of the debate.

                I know I for one, wouldn't mind hearing why people have to say about my case with regards to 50-50 if I shared some of the issues of it here as part of the debate. But with the experience I'v had myself with the one dreamy moderator, and hearing what they did to LF.. not sure if I feel comfortable sharing any more of my story on this site, or for that matter, if I want to even continue contributing to this site. Please kindly unban the fellow veteran.

                Back to the issue of 50-50, and some of the posts of posters claiming to be women, or mom's and offended, no where did either me or LF32 reference all women. We are both aware that there are women, many, and many on this site, that are in favour of shared parenting. They are aware of some of the things some, but not all, women do, and that's not to say men are perfect. Nobody is perfect.

                Back on topic, here is some other findings I have come across. From the USA. And don't go bashing the states because I just came back from there for a vacation. And I have traveled to the states before. I love it down there. If I could take my kid and go move down there , I so would. Seems to be a number of recent posts on this site of parents wanting to move to the states with their kids.

                Between August 5th and 7th, Public Policy Polling conducted a survey of 580 Old Line State voters of their attitudes toward shared parenting and Maryland law on child custody. A whopping 79% of respondents said they thought fathers and mothers should receive equal treatment by family courts in child custody decisions. Plus, 63% said they favored changing state law to “create a starting point whereby joint legal and physical custody – commonly referred to as shared parenting – for approximately equal periods of time is viewed as being in the best interests of the child.” Only 15% said they opposed such a change. - See more at: It?s a Landslide: Maryland voters endorse shared parenting - Baltimore Post-ExaminerBaltimore Post-Examiner
                That’s right in line with similar surveys in Canada and the United Kingdom that consistently find 70% – 80% of respondents favoring shared parenting. - See more at: It?s a Landslide: Maryland voters endorse shared parenting - Baltimore Post-ExaminerBaltimore Post-Examiner
                http://baltimorepostexaminer.com/lan....V6orxU1D.dpbs
                Last edited by trinton; 01-13-2017, 02:06 PM.

                Comment


                • Howdy folks. I hope all are enjoying the start of their weekend.

                  I started this thread to have a healthy debate regarding 50/50 parenting and what criteria some parents are using to deny that.

                  I want to reiterate, as I have many times, that NOT all mother's are gatekeepers. Also that "denying access" is actually justified in some situations.

                  To me this thread has been very informative from the beginning. I've covered what judges look at in general: 24(2)(4) and have MADE sure to point out that 50/50 is certainly not for everyone. If posters would like to stop by ... I don't feel that we need to be constantly be reminded that :

                  a) 50/50 is not for everyone. We have definitely covered that.
                  b) Not all mother's are gatekeepers. We have covered that also
                  c) Not everyone is our ex. We know that also.


                  I have been sure to touch on CLRA rules, caselaw and good peer reviewed academic aritcles and even mingled with some who are currently denying an equal relationship to try and get a feel of the situation.

                  Also, I'd like to discuss a bit about referencing sources in this thread. I was always under the impression that if somebody posts their case on the internet, that we could discuss that case if it is relevant to the topic. I recall my case being discussed on many threads but never had a problem with it.

                  To be clear, my piece on Mr Toronto .. he wrote himself in his early threads. He didn't write it for it not to be heard. He wanted to be heard. Perhaps his intention was to educate those who hide children and disallow access. If you come here and post your story, as many posters do .. it's for advice..and to be heard .. not to be private and hidden.

                  Throughout my own case, MANY posters took up many pages talking about their disbelief, that I was a liar, a phony...I was even called a catfish. Basically some felt I was a work of fiction. Some spent many hours poking holes in my stories for many pages. I've learned as of late that it was okay for some to do on my threads, but it not okay here. And I have no problem with that.

                  I made sure to let one poster know that I didn't think she was a terrible person or parent and that I felt this may help her prepare for court...just as the stuff did in my threads:

                  Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
                  To be honest I want to move on. She keeps stopping by so I have no issue responding.

                  I wish she would realize that nobody's here to bully her. She doesn't sound like a terrible person or parent.

                  Questions and discussions like these will actually help prepare her for court. I'm not sure she's seeing that though.
                  50/50 is in fact a touchy subject and I fully expected it to elicit some emotion..

                  I would however politely ask that personal insults/attacks about my character, my place of employment, etc be kept to yourselves. We're here to discuss "anything" that relates to 50/50 parenting ... not how good I am working in the special needs field (and yes I'm very good at what I do).

                  __________________________________________________ _____________

                  Moving on,

                  Many studies are actually showing that even if parents don't agree and are in some conflict, that their life improves once an equal parenting regime has been established.

                  As mentioned, in my case there was so much acrimony and the jaded, subjective notion by my ex that I wasn't a good parent totally diminished after 50/50. My ex realized that I in fact was a wonderful parent .. she can tell now that this is in fact in D5's best interests.

                  I'm an avid reader of peer-reviewed academic journals. In university I would stay up all night reading them and writing papers (I'm a nerd)

                  Recently, I very much enjoyed the study by:

                  Bauserman, R. (2012). "A meta-analysis of parental satisfaction, adjustment, and conflict in joint custody and sole custody following divorce," Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 53, 464-488.

                  Fabricius, W.V. et al (2011).Parenting time, parent conflict, parent-child relationships, and children’s physical health.” In Kuehnle, K. & Drozd, L. (Eds.), Parenting Plan Evaluations: Applied Research for the Family Court. New York: Oxford University Press.

                  Through a study which heavily controlled reliability and validity, it concluded that:

                  The constraints of traditional “access” relationships are well documented; closeness, warmth, and mutual understanding are elusive when parenting within the constraints of thin slices of time. Meaningful relationships are developed and sustained through emotional connectedness, and this is made possible through the emotional stability and security of meaningful (fair and equal) parenting time.
                  also ...

                  Studies showed that Equal Parent's had the best overall satisfaction in life:
                  Custodial or primary residential parents report the highest levels of satisfaction with parenting after divorce arrangements while non-custodial/non-residential parents report the lowest. Between these extremes lies equal parenting, where both mothers and fathers report satisfaction".
                  Also, a study found at: http://www.laughlinlaw.ca/blog/2014/...ing-time.shtmlIt stated:

                  A 2013 study with implications for parents in British Columbia and across Canada found that children of divorced parents have the best outcome when they can spend equal time with both parents. The study shows that shared parenting usually works to minimize abuse and contention between parents even when the parents disagree. A parent who has minimal time with a child generally seems to have reduced input into a child's life. Even a Supreme Court judge referred to the parent with less time as an 'interested bystander."
                  I understand that equal relationships arn't for everybody. I don't want this thread to only focus on why there "should" be equal relationships.

                  I want to hear opinions on why there "shouldn't" besides the obvious abuse, addictions, etc.

                  What behaviors would constitute denying equal relationships? If 2 parenst can't stand each other, what variables would inhibit a solid "Parallel Parenting regime with decreased contact and communication?

                  I look forward to this discussion.
                  Last edited by LovingFather32; 01-13-2017, 06:24 PM.

                  Comment


                  • welcome back, it's good to have you back.

                    I am very interested in learning more about parallel parenting.
                    Last edited by trinton; 01-13-2017, 06:32 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Parallel Parenting is an intelligent, effective option for parents who simply can't get along.

                      Those who say equal parenting can't be achieved because dad or mom is a jerk, etc shouldn't count this option out before outright denying access.

                      Here's a pretty good definition:

                      Parallel parenting is an arrangement in which divorced parents are able to co-parent by means of disengaging from each other, and having limited direct contact, in situations where they have demonstrated that they are unable to communicate with each other in a respectful manner. For intractable high conflict families, parallel parenting provides an opportunity for co-parenting, and although parents remain disengaged from each other they remain fully connected to their children. Within such an arrangement, parents may assume decision-making responsibility in different domains (such as one parent being responsible for medical decisions and the other for education). More often than not, however, they agree on major decisions regarding children’s upbringing but separately decide the logistics of routine, day-to-day parenting.
                      We often hear about judges not being able to decide which of the 500 affidavits of BS to believe between two warring parents. In the absence of any CAS reports, addictions, police records or patterns of spousal or child abuse, judges can resort to "Parallel Parenting".

                      The article also states that parallel parenting actually "shields" the kids from the destructive effects of parental conflict.

                      In parental conflict situations, in the majority of cases judges simply have no basis for deciding which parent should have primary custody of children; parallel parenting provides them with a viable co-parenting alternative. There is thus no reason that even in extreme cases of intractable conflict, parents cannot establish a co-parenting arrangement, particularly in light of recent evidence (Fabricius et al, 2010) that shared parenting shields children from the destructive effects of high conflict. Parallel parenting honors both parents as equal contributors to children’s growth and development, even in the presence of high conflict and different parenting philosophies, rules and routines, and lifestyles.
                      A mother or father shouldn't be able to walk into a court room shoving affidavits of subjective nonsense down a judges throat without any reliable, objective evidence from 3rd parties evaluating their "ability to parent". Mom or dad may be a jerk to each other...but love their kids more than anything and treat them 100% differently.

                      This solves any parent's campaign to seek sole custody by simply stating "They're a jerk..and they don't deserve a 50/50 relationship with their child".

                      Parallel Parenting may not be for everybody .. but it's an extremely attractive alternative for many parents and supported by a TON of caselaw!
                      https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...-after-divorce
                      Last edited by LovingFather32; 01-13-2017, 09:24 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Interesting thread.

                        Thanks to everyone for their thoughtful posts. I will peruse everything tomorrow AM.

                        Love lively debates!

                        Comment


                        • Since we're debating "what criteria" is used to determine (or deny) 50/50 equal parenting, I came across a case where a judge made a neat list (reflecting 24(2) of the CLRA).

                          Here it is:http://www.canlii.org/en/ns/nssc/doc...&resultIndex=1

                          [32] Justice Goodfellow, in his often quoted decision Foley v. Foley 1993 CanLII 3400 (NS SC), [1993] N.S.J. No. 347, outlined factors generally relevant to an assessment of what parenting arrangement is in a child’s best interest. At paras. 16-20, he wrote:
                          16 Nevertheless, there has emerged a number of areas of parenting that bear consideration in most cases including in no particular order the following:

                          1. Statutory direction Divorce Act 16(8) and 16(9), 17(5) and 17(6);

                          2. Physical environment:

                          3. Discipline;

                          4. Role model;

                          5. Wishes of the children - if, at the time of the hearing such are ascertainable and, to the extent they are ascertainable, such wishes are but one factor which may carry a great deal of weight in some cases and little, if any, in others. The weight to be attached is to be determined in the context of answering the question with whom would the best interests and welfare of the child be most likely achieved. That question requires the weighing of all the relevant factors and an analysis of the circumstances in which there may have been some indication or, expression by the child of a preference;

                          6. Religious and spiritual guidance;

                          7. Assistance of experts, such as social workers, psychologists- psychiatrists- etcetera;

                          8. Time availability of a parent for a child ;

                          9. The cultural development of a child:

                          10. The physical and character development of the child by such things as participation in sports:

                          11. The emotional support to assist in a child developing self esteem and confidence;

                          12. The financial contribution to the welfare of a child.

                          13. The support of an extended family, uncles, aunts, grandparents, etcetera;

                          14. The willingness of a parent to facilitate contact with the other parent. This is a recognition of the child's entitlement to access to parents and each parent's obligation to promote and encourage access to the other parent. The Divorce Act s. 16(10) and s. 17(9);

                          15. The interim and long range plan for the welfare of the children.

                          16. The financial consequences of custody. Frequently the financial reality is the child must remain in the home or, perhaps alternate accommodations provided by a member of the extended family. Any other alternative requiring two residence expenses will often adversely and severely impact on the ability to adequately meet the child's reasonable needs; and

                          17. Any other relevant factors.
                          It might be a good starting point for some parents to catch a glimpse of what criteria a judge uses.

                          Also, don't worry if you never want to see your ex and cant stand them. As this judge points out:

                          [49] With the advent of the electronic age, parents can now effectively communicate with one author about their children without having to have face to face contract. This can reduce conflict on the assumption that such communication does not contain any incitefull or accusatory language. In Winterwerb v Winterwerb , 2004 Carswell BC 62 (SC) the Court ordered the parties to communicate by email until communication improved.
                          Despite the parent's conflict, acrimony, inability to effectively communicate and poor images of each other .. the judge still ordered parallel parenting for an equal parenting regime.

                          [60] But for the strained communication issues and disagreement regarding discipline, the Court would have considered maintaining the shared parenting arrangement. But upon review of the evidence I accept Sherry MacDonald’s concerns regarding Connor’s school issues and I find she is the preferred parent to address these concerns in Connor’s best interests. Similarly David MacDonald is the preferred parents to address Connor’s sporting and recreational activities. As a result the Court will order that a parallel parenting regime be created to exploit each parent’s strengths to the benefit of Connor.

                          [61] It is in Connor’s best interest that Sherry MacDonald be primarily responsible for Connor’s education and medical needs. David MacDonald shall be solely responsible for Connor’s recreational needs.
                          A nice read!
                          Last edited by LovingFather32; 01-14-2017, 01:42 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
                            Since we're debating "what criteria" is used to determine (or deny) 50/50 equal parenting, I came across a case where a judge made a neat list (reflecting 24(2) of the CLRA).

                            Here it is:http://www.canlii.org/en/ns/nssc/doc...&resultIndex=1

                            It might be a good starting point for some parents to catch a glimpse of what criteria a judge uses.

                            Also, don't worry if you never want to see your ex and cant stand them. As this judge points out:



                            Despite the parent's conflict, acrimony, inability to effectively communicate and poor images of each other .. the judge still ordered parallel parenting for an equal parenting regime.



                            A nice read!


                            So does this mean that dad in this case gets to make decisions on sports related things without consulting mom and mom can decide on anything medical and school related without consulting with dad? Does this type of thing get mandated often in situations with high conflict? (I don't have as much knowledge of cases on Canlii). Just asking in general.


                            Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Ange71727 View Post
                              So does this mean that dad in this case gets to make decisions on sports related things without consulting mom and mom can decide on anything medical and school related without consulting with dad?
                              Yes (it would be reasonable to send an e-mail and discuss it). Some cases have the necessity to consult, but the parent gets the final decision).

                              Originally posted by Ange71727 View Post
                              Does this type of thing get mandated often in situations with high conflict? (I don't have as much knowledge of cases on Canlii). Just asking in general.
                              Yes. In fact that is what it's designed for. There are a high percentage of canlii cases where this happens.

                              I also think that recreation refers to more activities than sports. For instance if your child was in Sparks, scouts, dance or singing in a choir that would be considered recreation.
                              Last edited by LovingFather32; 01-14-2017, 04:34 PM. Reason: typo

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by arabian View Post
                                Love lively debates!
                                We aim to keep it lively.
                                Start a discussion, not a fire. Post with kindness.

                                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