Moving out of Country

[HammerDad]

Well, here is one from February 22, 2018, where Habitual Residence is defined as:

" “Habitually resident” is defined in s.22(2)(a)-(c) pf the CLRA as follows:

Habitual residence

22 (2) A child is habitually resident in the place where he or she resided,

(a) with both parents;

(b) where the parents are living separate and apart, with one parent under a separation agreement or with the consent, implied consent or acquiescence of the other or under a court order; or

(c) with a person other than a parent on a permanent basis for a significant period of time, whichever last occurred. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.12, s. 22 (2); 2016, c. 23, s. 6."

"https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2018/2018onsc1206/2018onsc1206.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAeaGFiaXR1YW wgcmVzaWRlbmNlLCBmYW1pbHkgbGF3AAAAAAE&resultIndex= 5

Just because you have posted thousands of posts on the topic, doesn't give you the right to tell a woman she should seek to better herself.

Ugg, somehow this got dragged into be a feminism issue.... Had the OP been male, the script would have been the same. That you can move all you want. You can't move with the kids without a) the ex's permission or b) a court order. Sex has nothing to do with the test.

It is about whether or not the move is in the kids best interests. The OP will have to give valid reason of why this is the kids best interests, not a sexist diatribe.

[rockscan]

Ugg, somehow this got dragged into be a feminism issue.... Had the OP been male, the script would have been the same. That you can move all you want. You can't move with the kids without a) the ex's permission or b) a court order. Sex has nothing to do with the test.

It is about whether or not the move is in the kids best interests. The OP will have to give valid reason of why this is the kids best interests, not a sexist diatribe.

Amen brother

Lets hope the follow up isnt “children belong with their mother”.

Always remember that you can find any number of cases that support your position just as there are cases that go against your position. If you ex can show up and demonstrate effectively why you taking the kids is a bad idea, he will win. Tread carefully. A new job making more money is useless if you are paying interest on legal fees owed to get there.

[ensorcelled]

Amen brother

Lets hope the follow up isnt “children belong with their mother”.

Always remember that you can find any number of cases that support your position just as there are cases that go against your position. If you ex can show up and demonstrate effectively why you taking the kids is a bad idea, he will win. Tread carefully. A new job making more money is useless if you are paying interest on legal fees owed to get there.

I don't think it's that straightforward. Many women follow their spouses for their better jobs or to increase their earnings and if the relationship doesn't work out, and now she has to move out of town to get those same opportunities, she should pursue them. You can't extoll the virtues of shared parenting by also recognising that having the kids half the time may not automatically give you the job you need to move up the corporate ladder or better yourself and your long-term employment prospects.

[ensorcelled]

Ugg, somehow this got dragged into be a feminism issue.... Had the OP been male, the script would have been the same. That you can move all you want. You can't move with the kids without a) the ex's permission or b) a court order. Sex has nothing to do with the test.

It is about whether or not the move is in the kids best interests. The OP will have to give valid reason of why this is the kids best interests, not a sexist diatribe.

But it's not a secret women generally fare off worse financially when they are single mothers AND when they are in shared parenting situations. This is the norm and even the data out of Scandinavian countries (where they are pushing quotas, equal pay legislation and shared parenting for a long time now) show that women are still making less than men. If she has to better her life by moving I'm going to guess she's exhausted all options in her current city and she should not be held back because the consequences of NOT taking those opportunities are much graver for women than men.

You can't claim equality in one area (parenting) and then deny the consequences of it. Men are STILL benefitting from 'equality' more than women are and probably ever will.

[MommaMouse]

Ugg, somehow this got dragged into be a feminism issue.... Had the OP been male, the script would have been the same. That you can move all you want. You can't move with the kids without a) the ex's permission or b) a court order. Sex has nothing to do with the test.

It is about whether or not the move is in the kids best interests. The OP will have to give valid reason of why this is the kids best interests, not a sexist diatribe.

I agree ....I really don't want to bring this into a feminist debate. I am a mother, but that doesn't change the requirements or for that matter my opportunities within my company, in fact I hate the fact that it actually may in some ways increase the odds that I will be selected for positions I apply for (I am in a very male dominated field).

What I don't want to happen is to go apply for a job blindly not knowing what it means for the children. I am the custodial parent and with that comes more responsibility for ensuring that what I do is best for all of us and I didn't want to make these decisions lightly.

Some of what was said might sound harsh but reality is harsh and I really appreciate all the viewpoints shared. At times I have to choose between my career and my kids... everyone does regardless of sex. We do it everyday without thinking.

In the end it came down to is this job/promotion worth the fight. Reading through ALL the threads and case law I believe I would have a better chance than most of winning if he were to fight me. However, the time, cost, effort and disruption out weighed any potential benefit.....I'm not a doctor going from making $230k to 500k+. This isn't to say I'll never apply to other advancement opportunities, just not this position this far away.

[Rioe]

What's the harm in asking your ex what he thinks? Tell him that your job is unstable, which is potentially very bad for the children, and this is a possibility you are considering to alleviate that uncertainty.

Maybe he'd rather have solid holiday weeks with the children than EoW which tends to disrupt schedules more. Especially if it means the older kid might be willing to go. And especially if you reduce his CS to account for increased travel expenses.

[ensorcelled]

Ugg, somehow this got dragged into be a feminism issue.... Had the OP been male, the script would have been the same. That you can move all you want. You can't move with the kids without a) the ex's permission or b) a court order. Sex has nothing to do with the test.

It is about whether or not the move is in the kids best interests. The OP will have to give valid reason of why this is the kids best interests, not a sexist diatribe.

I get that, but it's not up for debate anymore. We are doing worse than men in all kinds of areas and no amount of social engineering is fixing it.

[ensorcelled]

What's the harm in asking your ex what he thinks? Tell him that your job is unstable, which is potentially very bad for the children, and this is a possibility you are considering to alleviate that uncertainty.

Maybe he'd rather have solid holiday weeks with the children than EoW which tends to disrupt schedules more. Especially if it means the older kid might be willing to go. And especially if you reduce his CS to account for increased travel expenses.

Excellent point.

[MommaMouse]

What's the harm in asking your ex what he thinks? Tell him that your job is unstable, which is potentially very bad for the children, and this is a possibility you are considering to alleviate that uncertainty.

Maybe he'd rather have solid holiday weeks with the children than EoW which tends to disrupt schedules more. Especially if it means the older kid might be willing to go. And especially if you reduce his CS to account for increased travel expenses.

I wish it was that easy for me My ex is Bipolar.....and not like 'i have a crazy ex....but like diagnosed, sometimes committed Bipolar. I have to be home at all times he has the kids....just in case he can't handle them (which happens often) This is the reality of co-parenting with a mentally ill ex. I walk a very tight line on what I can or should ask him. A question on his opinion on this (or really any other controversial subject) could easily lead to multiple police/CAS calls, instability for the kids or land him in the hospital. (all of which is why I think I have a better chance than most at actually being able to move) Hence I ask here

[HammerDad]

I get that, but it's not up for debate anymore. We are doing worse than men in all kinds of areas and no amount of social engineering is fixing it.

So, we are going full sexist diatribe... ok then... and men are doing far worse than women in many areas as well, but I am not about to lower myself to a pissing contest of who has it worst. We try to balance it out where we can and should treat each other equally. But this isn't about balance or equality between the sexes, it is about the "best interests of the child(ren)". Nothing more, nothing less.

[Tayken]

So, we are going full sexist diatribe... ok then... and men are doing far worse than women in many areas as well, but I am not about to lower myself to a pissing contest of who has it worst. We try to balance it out where we can and should treat each other equally. But this isn't about balance or equality between the sexes, it is about the "best interests of the child(ren)". Nothing more, nothing less.

As well, the original poster (OP) has left the thread a few messages back explicitly stating:

Some of what was said might sound harsh but reality is harsh and I really appreciate all the viewpoints shared. At times I have to choose between my career and my kids... everyone does regardless of sex. We do it everyday without thinking.

In the end it came down to is this job/promotion worth the fight. Reading through ALL the threads and case law I believe I would have a better chance than most of winning if he were to fight me. However, the time, cost, effort and disruption out weighed any potential benefit.....I'm not a doctor going from making $230k to 500k+. This isn't to say I'll never apply to other advancement opportunities, just not this position this far away.

The OP of this thread got the answer and made a decision on how they would move forward. The whole debate ongoing now is an "ughhh" for sure.

Ultimately, when people contemplate the option rationally... Mobility is a very difficult situation.

High conflict people often do not read things fully. Hence the reason I highlighted the OP's comments in red and bold and italic where necessary. So they can SEE that the OP isn't going with their option to fight-it-out-in-court.

I agree with you HammerDad this pissing contest doesn't produce any value to anyone. Especially the OP who has (see quote above) already made their decision.

We are all now beating a dead horse.

Good Luck!
Tayken

[ensorcelled]

So, we are going full sexist diatribe... ok then... and men are doing far worse than women in many areas as well, but I am not about to lower myself to a pissing contest of who has it worst. We try to balance it out where we can and should treat each other equally. But this isn't about balance or equality between the sexes, it is about the "best interests of the child(ren)". Nothing more, nothing less.

Would you not agree that kids seeing their mom take new opportunities and better her financial and employment straits is in their best interest? Or should she (hypothetically) stay in whatever small town she was married in, stay in her dead end job and just keep on truckin' until they are in 18 and who knows what her job prospects will be?

Also, in which areas are men doing worse than women in terms of work? Politics? Business? Medicine? IT? Sports? Defence? Law? I think you have most of those tied up, actually....

[HammerDad]

Would you not agree that kids seeing their mom take new opportunities and better her financial and employment straits is in their best interest? Or should she (hypothetically) stay in whatever small town she was married in, stay in her dead end job and just keep on truckin' until they are in 18 and who knows what her job prospects will be?

You make sound like allowing the children to stay in their familiar location with their friends, likely extended family and there other parent is a bad thing. There is nothing wrong with a parent looking to further their career. However, doing at the expense of the children's relationship with their other parent isn't in their best interests in most circumstances.

Also, in which areas are men doing worse than women in terms of work? Politics? Business? Medicine? IT? Sports? Defence? Law? I think you have most of those tied up, actually....

I don't know, little things like life expectancy, post secondary education enrollment, military casualties etc. are some simple examples. Your example of law belies the current statistic of about 60% of law students are female. Another example is that in contested custody cases women are 4 times more likely to win sole custody then men, notwithstanding that more and more males are involved in their child's lives than ever before in history. That there are about 3 men's shelters in the country in comparison to the number of women's shelters. I am not going to cry about my position, because I have it pretty good. I am also not about to go on about how bad men may or may not have it, as both sexes have things are unequal to the other. It is a simple fact, and at least I am willing to acknowledge it.

[cashcow4ex]

Would you not agree that kids seeing their mom take new opportunities and better her financial and employment straits is in their best interest? Or should she (hypothetically) stay in whatever small town she was married in, stay in her dead end job and just keep on truckin' until they are in 18 and who knows what her job prospects will be?

This sounds like a movie Reese Witherspoon should star in!

I think the opposite could hold true as well. Kids seeing their parent uproot their entire lives from everything and everyone they've ever known and moving them to another country, thus effectively reducing them to a single parent family for a better job prospect would be doing so as a detriment to that child. Past case law also demonstrates that the courts also believe the above to be true judging on how hard it is to get a judge to approve it .

[ensorcelled]

You make sound like allowing the children to stay in their familiar location with their friends, likely extended family and there other parent is a bad thing. There is nothing wrong with a parent looking to further their career. However, doing at the expense of the children's relationship with their other parent isn't in their best interests in most circumstances.

I don't know, little things like life expectancy, post secondary education enrollment, military casualties etc. are some simple examples. Your example of law belies the current statistic of about 60% of law students are female. Another example is that in contested custody cases women are 4 times more likely to win sole custody then men, notwithstanding that more and more males are involved in their child's lives than ever before in history. That there are about 3 men's shelters in the country in comparison to the number of women's shelters. I am not going to cry about my position, because I have it pretty good. I am also not about to go on about how bad men may or may not have it, as both sexes have things are unequal to the other. It is a simple fact, and at least I am willing to acknowledge it.

That last paragraph is hilariously wrong.

Law schools may be tipping to have more female students, but most law firm partners, law school deans, judges and tenured law profs are male. You're still at the top of the food chain no matter how you slice the admissions process...

And please share an actual statistics that show that women get more 'sole custody' than men. Did you read the Motherrisk report? Most people who got their children taken away were women, not fathers.
http://motheriskcommission.ca/wp-con...Commission.pdf

As for military casualties, you should check out the research by Andrea Lane at Dalhousie: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/...20702017741910 (among others).
Men are more likely to be in upper-level roles in the military, hence higher salaries, pensions and better benefits.
Men are more likely to be doing procurement contracting, building ships and planes, sourcing guns and weaponry, get hired for lobbying, and all the benefits that come from those stable military-centered jobs than women are.

So yes, you may have more casualties than women, but men benefit way more from military jobs and military life than women can ever imagine.

As for the shelters, you realise this is because women need family units more than they need individual units, yes? Domestic violence is overwhelmingly committed towards woman than the other way around.

On topic?
I never said staying in one place was a bad thing, but that in reality, women (who overwhelmingly do not benefit from divorce financially even if they are getting child support) have to often move to better their lives. You're assuming that such a move would upend the lives of the child(ren) to the point where they would be alienated from their fathers. All of these need to be taken on a case-by-case basis but starting from 'Most law school students are women!' isn't helping move the equality needle, or affirming what the best interests of the child is.