No announcement yet.

Final Order Does not Make Sense

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Final Order Does not Make Sense

    Hi all,

    So I got a final order for every other weekend with a twist:

    the only time that visits do not have to be supervised is during the day outside the home. That is to say, that if I am with the children during the day in the community (shopping mall, park, etc.) there is no supervision requirement. However, at any time that I am in any home that does not constitute in the community, I am to be to be supervised by a family member.

    This has been built into a permanent order, and no step-up schedule to remove the supervision.

    Does this make sense? Is this something that can be appealed?

    There are no allegations of sexual abuse or drugs. There are allegations that I get stressed out and may physically discipline the child, which I deny. But nevertheless, how does this get built into a final order?

    What can be done?

  • #2
    The judge had a reason to believe you need supervision. You can deny it all you want but in the end, the evidence at trial was enough to warrant a decision for supervision. It does make sense. In public there are witnesses. At home there are not.

    Do what it says and in a couple years demonstrate a material change in the sense that you have had x days where nothing happened.

    Or you can appeal it showing all the evidence why it isnít going to happen and pay the costs to go through that. The problem is you pleaded out and that in addition to whatever evidence was presented at trial was enough to make the judge put this in the order.

    You really need to get it through your head that something (or several somethings) happened and were proven in court that resulted in this decision.


    • #3
      I hope you are doing well.
      You did the trial and got a ruling, I suppose there is a paper saying why the judge ruled the way they did?

      Never the less the judge found a reason to state supervision is required and no one here can say why they put that in. It is a positive thing that they say you do not need supervision out in the community which is better than some where a judge states they need supervision 24/7. I know someone that went through that and in the end it was demonstrated that they did not need any supervision.

      There are many things that you can do but from reading your posts is sounds like the best thing you can do is get your mental health in check and let time pass. 1-3 years? Time is a material change and that will allow you to bring something new to the table.

      After being compelled to be outdoors for a ton of time you might turn into some super parent. Picnics, fishing, the beach, hiking. if you can pull that off then you might be better off and also....that super parent thing sounds pretty good.

      There was an allegation of physicality and I am going to take a guess you presented as a wildcard to the judge and they erred on the side of caution. Prove them wrong I suppose. Let it be said later on by anyone that supervised you that they had no perception of something being off.

      You have a lawyer, what did they say?


      • #4
        Thank you for all your replies. I will take both of your suggestions. The problem is, I just see this turning into an issue where my ex is questioning the kids if a supervisor was home, and getting the kids to say 'no', and then reducing/denying access as a result.

        My lawyer is looking to see if there is an opportunity to appeal it. He will let me know sometime this week.


        • #5
          Who cares what she asks them. Itís no different than saying ďwho did you see at daddyís house?Ē Or the kids may voluntarily tell her. YOU have an issue with it because you donít want to have supervision. Itís no different than having gramma come over and see her at daddyís house etc. If you have someone there then there is no issue for you. You just donít like the order.

          Unfortunately you need to suck it up and accept your new reality.


          • #6
            Your ex cannot do that. It would require a court order and an investigation.
            If your lawyer doesn't have a definitive answer for you then I would not go on their "I think this might work", it will cost a ton of money.
            I would have thought a clause in there saying this item could be revisited at time X might have made its way in there, maybe simply the passing of time allows the revisit.

            Solution: Be vigilant about keeping a journal and having the other person sign it daily. Take selfie with supervisor and email them to yourself with timestamps daily or at least often, you will sleep better at night knowing you are safe. Be positive about it you want to alleviate the courts concern of your stability/behavior.

            Take parenting classes, this is a must from what you described.

            Don't let the kids catch on to this at all.
            Don't record yourself inside the house with the kids for this purpose, not at all as I have seen 24/7 internal security footage be labeled as a mental health issue.

            This journal and record will also help you with court later on as it will go along way to show you endured this well and are stable.

            I am not a a lawyer, others can comment on this logic.
            Last edited by pinkHouses; 05-30-2022, 10:01 AM.


            • #7
              Originally posted by pinkHouses View Post
              Time is a material change and that will allow you to bring something new to the table.
              No, it's not. There is case law that says the mere passage of time does not constitute a material change.


              • #8
                Originally posted by Brampton33 View Post
                In fairness to OP, supervised access is usually meant to be temporary and last resort.

                Its ordered for 2 reasons. As a means to facilitate reunification where there has been an absence; or where there is a perceived possibility of harm or negligent behaviour (ie: substance abuse).

                Usually there is a graduated weening off of supervised access. Surprised that was not built into the order; or at least; an opportunity at some point to re-visit if it is still deemed necessary.
                nope. Not always.

                If the courts think the parent isn't stable enough- they can and sometimes do order indefinite supervised access.

                What the OP will need to do is get help. Document that they got help and prove they are no longer a threat.


                • #9
                  Originally posted by iona6656 View Post
                  No, it's not. There is case law that says the mere passage of time does not constitute a material change.

                  the aging of the child from 3 to 7, the father’s increased ability to meet her needs, the father’s consistent exercise of time, and the close relationship he developed with the child.


                  • #10
                    this is what I meant:

                    "The aging of a child does not automatically constitute a material change, but it can be a major factor". It will be fact specific.

                    Look at what the OP has said may be the reasoning behind why supervision was ordered- the mere aging of the child isn't going to be the magic bullet.


                    • #11
                      You were referring to old case law. Time is a consideration now.
                      Not mere aging, but increased ability to meet kid's needs, consistent exercise of time, and the close relationship to child.

                      This will help many eow parents - including OP.



                      • #12
                        "I mean something different"....seems lame to me.
                        People get a long better when they say "my mistake, let me reword my statement please"

                        Time is a material change to revisit for consideration and I am going to bet there is an argument for the mere maturing of a child to be a change.

                        If helenJ comes back and says (this is all fictional)
                        -over the last 2 years there have been no issues and here is my evidence for that.
                        -I took several parenting courses
                        -I coach young kids at soccer - look at all these letters of praise I a have.
                        -I figured out my issues with my therapist/doctor.

                        If HelenJ goes back 6 months from now and says the same thing. Nope. 3

                        If they come back 2 years from now and say "Hey! My kid is older so lets switch it up!" and fails to back that up with good stuff. Nope. OR if HelenJ does well but something bad happens, nope.

                        Hoping the best on this.


                        • #13
                          HelenJ congratulations on not giving up, seeing it through and actually getting an order, though not entirely what you wanted, it did provide for some unsupervised access. Now take a step back and breathe. You have accomplished several important things:
                          1. You have unsupervised outdoor access
                          2. You have fought for your kids and have a relationship with them
                          3. You are no longer in a marriage that wasn’t working

                          These are things to be proud of and celebrate and a great starting point from which to move forward and build a new and better life. If you can acknowledge that you did things which caused the judge to make an order for supervised access indoors, then you have taken the first step to reclaiming your power. The advice the other posters have given you is on the mark. Best of luck to you.


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by iona6656 View Post
                            this is what I meant:

                            "The aging of a child does not automatically constitute a material change, but it can be a major factor". It will be fact specific.

                            Look at what the OP has said may be the reasoning behind why supervision was ordered- the mere aging of the child isn't going to be the magic bullet.

                            Agreed. In this case I have a strong feeling it is the poster who has a problem dealing with stresses. Kids are stressful at any age and if a parent canít cope, it becomes a challenge.

                            For him I donít think he can wait until they are x age. He needs to get into therapy, anger management classes, parenting classes, understanding children classes and learning to cope classes. Some people just cannot handle stress. Unfortunately there are those who lash out rather than learning skills to better manage.

                            Judges donít just rubber stamp shit. They listen to evidence and make a decision based on that. There was enough evidence to make the judge rule in this way. Considering that OP has skated around taking responsibility, I think his first step is accepting that he did things that were wrong. One of his first statements about this order was that he disagrees with the allegations. They arenít allegations anymore. The judge took them as fact and ruled accordingly. Itís not weak or shameful to admit you did things wrong as a parent or a spouse. What is shameful is not doing something about it to help fix the problem.


                            • #15
                              Last edited by pinkHouses; 06-01-2022, 10:16 AM.


                              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.