"Medling" with other family - lice accusations

[Tayken]

Wasn't aware of that. My Ontario family court lawyer asked for letters (medical, counselor, neighbour) and submitted them with the documents. Judge referred to them so I'm assuming they were read. There was no indication that they were not admissible. I'm talking about cases (conferences) in front of a judge, not a trial situation, of course. Could there be a difference?

There is a significant difference between a Conference and a Motion/Trial. Conferences under the Family Law Rules is governed under mediation and the briefs are not sworn statements. A lot of negative advocate solicitors sell snake oil to their clients that they can "shotgun" a brief or motion, to collect negative advocates, etc... Doesn't bold well for the party that does it. As demonstrated in the case law posted to this site it often blows up in the person's face. Not a recommended course of conduct.

Settle that which can be settled, and don't use Conferences to "err grievances" in my opinion. Demonstrate you can settle... Not that you can "win" your case.

That must have been one massive brief that was submitted. Unfortunate that your lawyer didn't advise you of the purpose of a Conference prior to having you compose all that information and a large brief. Briefs are returned to both parties and the documents provided are returned.

Depending on the size of your brief and the substantive (children's health and well being) issues before the court did the matter proceed on motion? As a Conference judge cannot make orders substantive issues. They can only order technical things like disclosure, proceeding to trial or motion, etc... This can only be done through consent by both parties, on motion, or at trial.

Good Luck!
Tayken

[Tayken]

Wasn't aware of that. My Ontario family court lawyer asked for letters (medical, counselor, neighbour) and submitted them with the documents. Judge referred to them so I'm assuming they were read. There was no indication that they were not admissible. I'm talking about cases (conferences) in front of a judge, not a trial situation, of course. Could there be a difference?

Difference between a "letter" and an "affidavit" or "medical record".

A medical record is governed under provincial and federal legislature. Furthermore, it is governed by the clinician's governing (registering) body as well. It is a statement made to the truth basically by the clinician. The rules for medical records are very strict and the colleges audit doctors all the time to insure they are following legislation.

An affidavit is a sworn statement to the truth. Simple as that. The person submitting the affidavit is making an affirmation that what they are stating is the truth. The rules of perjury apply if the statement is demonstrated to be untruthful and destroys credibility of the person. The person who supplies the affidavit can be called and examined through discovery on their affidavit evidence or called as a witness at trial.

A "letter", even from a doctor is a statement of opinion. Opinions are hearsay. Although a doctor brings credibility somewhat their letter can often be self serving to the person they are writing for. Furthermore, if matters are before the court, the Doctor in question's conduct for actually supplying a "letter" should not be doing so in accordance with the Acts and their own governing body's policies and requirements. Especially the common "to whom it may concern" blanket letters. To make the letter more reliable the person in question's medical records should be attached and the evidence to their statements should be provided. This is the requirement set forth by most, if not all, colleges.

Letter from a neighbour, friend, relative, etc... A demonstration that you can gather negative advocates and have people say mean things about the other party. I highly recommend anyone considering bringing these people into matters to seriously consider the impact it has on their case and if their materials are relevant.

Good Luck!
Tayken

[HammerDad]

Yeah, "Satan" would likely not help diffuse anything...lol...but somedays, it doesn't seem far from the truth. :-)

I have little pet names for when I do these types of letters on the board. Satan and Satan's Life Coach being my favourite.

Should she request that you do something or she will deny you parenting time, simply reply that:

Should you have legitimate concerns with my house and/or parenting ability, I will be willing to entertain your concerns. However, I will not subject myself to unwarranted criticism or any matter put forth in an aggressive or demanding manner.

I will continue to co-parent with you to the best of my ability. I do my best efforts to ensure that [child] has a safe and healthy environment. While we may not have the same standards or parenting style, that does not make either of us wrong or in some way inferior. All parents will parent differently and in doing so should provide balance to the child, which is in their best interests.

Thank you.

[hadenough]

I always laugh when I see "Dear Satan" b/c (privately of course) that is what I refer to my ex as. Admittedly, I have a few pet names for him. Others (men and women) have told me that they too refer to their ex's as "Satan."

Cute unfortunate, but cute.

[Tayken]

Tayken,

"with a highly conflicted individual as described they will come. Not only will they come they will bring "friends and family" with them to cause more conflict generally."

How right you are. The first time she tried bringing this up, about my household being in a state of uncleanliness, etc, back when my daughter was younger... she demanded on inspecting my house, before my daughter was allowed to come back (against our access arrangements, I know). And she wanted to bring her best friend.

It is just done to create "conflict" by the person doing it. Common tactic of a highly conflicted litigant. They try to get their "friends" (negative advocates) to help, file affidavits, make up lies... They will sit around for months post-coordinating their affidavit materials. What they don't realize is that although they think they are being "creative" the courts have seen it all before. A good family law lawyer who has real experience in highly conflicted situations can walk you through all the "truisms" (tactics). CanLII exposes them well too.

Another thing a highly conflicted litigant's negative advocates will do in these situations is try to stair you down. They will make threatening faces at you, gestures etc... It is all transparent and only demonstrates who is generating the conflict in the matter.

[nogoingback]

:

Dear Satan,

Thank you for advising me that [child] is/has [whatever].

Unfortunately I do not agree with your position that I will be unable to exercise my parenting time on X date due to such condition. According to section X of our court order, I am entitled to parenting time. Section X of the order does not provide that such parenting time is conditional on the child being in perfect health. As a parent, I am capable of tending to [childs] needs in both sickness and in health. Further, being a parent is more than looking after the child while they are healthy.

I also disagree with your position that the [issue] is my fault or resulted during my parenting time. Children are susceptible due getting all sorts of illnesses simply by the vast number of other children they interact with everyday. I don't accuse you or your household of being responsible for [childs] illnesses when [child] comes over for my parenting time, and as such I respectfully request the same considersation.

In closing, it is my intention to exercising my regularly scheduled parenting time. I do not agree with your unilateral decision to withhold the child from my parenting time in contravention of clause X of the court order. As such, I will be at the prescribed place at the prescribed time for our childs exchange. Should [child] not be exchanged due to your unilateral decision to withhold the child, I will treat such interferrance as a denial of access and will seek the appropriate remedy.

I am willing to consider rescheduling my parenting time to a time mutually agreeable. Should we fail to find a time mutually agreeable, the regular parenting time schedule shall continue.

Thank you,

Superdad.

An old post, but wanted to say thanks as it came in handy when I used this today. My ex denied me access because of my daughter's sore throat, and of course threatened to call the police if I dared try taking my daughter during my parenting time. I'm not sure how to handle these situations, but I chose/choose to walk away so as not to put my daughters through police involvement. Ex feels empowered by the use od 911. So frustrating.

[rockscan]

Partners ex did this in 2013 when their 17 yo had a sinus infection (and had been on antibiotics for almost a week). He went to see his lawyer who had done his divorce a year earlier to get a letter. She backed down when he came back with it. And it was a saturday so you can imagine what the fee for that was.

[Serene]

I think a lot of the above is overkill advice.

Lice is a fact of life. It isn't caught by negligence. You need to reinforce you are as capable in lice treatment as mom. The end.

[red6419]

I think a lot of the above is overkill advice.

Lice is a fact of life. It isn't caught by negligence. You need to reinforce you are as capable in lice treatment as mom. The end.

Lice is also not a medical condition - my ex tried that when my child had lice - ex said child needed to stay home to "get better". Ummmm what? But thanks for being a douchebag - I'll take an extra long weekend with kid

[stripes]

Lice is also not a medical condition - my ex tried that when my child had lice - ex said child needed to stay home to "get better". Ummmm what? But thanks for being a douchebag - I'll take an extra long weekend with kid

(not that your ex isn't a jerk, but some child care facilities do ask that kids with lice stay home until they've been treated and the lice are gone - easily accomplished with anti-lice shampoo).

[Serene]

Coping with lice: Why banning kids from class may not be the answer - The Globe and Mail

Interesting read.