Ottawa Divorce .com Forums

Ottawa Divorce .com Forums (https://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/index.php)
-   Parenting Issues (https://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Yet Another Stupid Arguement (https://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13823)

arabian 12-06-2012 10:09 PM

I agree with Janus.

IF you are the custodial parent you are responsible for your children. He doesn't want to see the kids. You have to accept it and move on. Be thankful he gave you warning. It probably screws with your plans but oh well. You have custody and that is all part of it.

Movie night in?

OhMy 12-06-2012 10:17 PM

Janus and Arabian have very valid points. Bottom line, you can't force someone to be a parent and make use of his/her access time.

It's too bad that he has done this. Typically after 2-3 days of antibiotics, strep throat if that is his valid reason starts to drastically improve.

I hope it works out and what ever happens this weekend or where the kids end up that they remain unaffected by it as much as possible and have a good weekend.

Unevenplayingground 12-06-2012 10:40 PM

I was a single mother with sole custody. If my ex called me because he was sick, I would definitely keep them home with me if it was contagious. I would have let him take the next weekend in exchange. I would rather have them enjoy their time with their father and not come home sick. Even if we had shared custody, and he was sick, I would sooner keep them until he was better. I would hope he would do the same favour for me, if the time ever arose.

motherbear4 12-06-2012 11:49 PM

Again, thanks to everyone. I seriously weighed the two big options, drop them off or just keep them, prior to posting here. Its a crappy road to walk trying to come to a decision. Your varying opinions are helping me to come to a decision.

At the end of the day, it really will be the kids upset either way. I'd rather have them home where they are wanted for this particular weekend, rather than where they are not.

SadAndTired 12-07-2012 12:15 AM

Well, if he really is sick, then okay. But if he consistently cancels then I think this theory applies...

Family Law Toronto :: Child Custody :: www.familylawtoronto.com

"The most serious complaints have to do with missed access. Access is considered at law to be the right of the child. It is not the right of the access parent nor is it a punishment of the custodial parent. It is the right of the child to maintain contact and develop a relationship with both parents.

When court ordered access does not take place because of the actions of one parent or the other, the party responsible can expect to be brought back to court. If the access parent consistently misses or cancels access, a judge may curtail the access. Raising a child as a single parent can be an exhausting, all-consuming exercise. The custodial parent has a right to the occasional weekend to him/herself. More importantly, the child has a right to see the access parent and he or she may be disappointed when access visits are cancelled by that parent.

If access is persistently missed, the court may order it be suspended rather than expose the child to future disappointments."


Sending my ex this link helped with "access" cancellations.

Hope it works out.

Janus 12-07-2012 02:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SadAndTired (Post 118287)
It is the right of the child to maintain contact and develop a relationship with both parents.

This would imply that there is an obligation for a non-custodial parent to develop a relationship. That would be... interesting.

Quote:

The custodial parent has a right to the occasional weekend to him/herself.
Where are these rights coming from?

Quote:

If access is persistently missed, the court may order it be suspended rather than expose the child to future disappointments."
Well, that part I believe at least

Quote:

Sending my ex this link helped with "access" cancellations.
You can't expect all ex's to be swayed by such silly stuff.

SadAndTired 12-11-2012 07:54 PM

Quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by SadAndTired
It is the right of the child to maintain contact and develop a relationship with both parents.


This would imply that there is an obligation for a non-custodial parent to develop a relationship. That would be... interesting.
Here you go Janus. Tayken provided caselaw....

http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...t-child-13856/

I know it is sort of a reverse argument, but could it not be made? That the child has a right to the see the non custodial parent regardless of the ncp's plans?

Janus 12-11-2012 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SadAndTired (Post 118684)
I know it is sort of a reverse argument, but could it not be made? That the child has a right to the see the non custodial parent regardless of the ncp's plans?

My understanding is that a child has a right of access to a willing noncustodial parent, and a custodial parent has an obligation to provide that access.

I would be very surprised if a non-custodial parent has an obligation to provide anything other than cash. Frankly, the world would probably be a better place if NC's had to provide love instead of cash, but family law is not set up to enforce that type of stuff. Cash is a good substitute for love in our system :)

OhMy 12-11-2012 10:39 PM

Janus,

It is clear that you are upset at having to pay cs. I am under the impression though that you do pay it.

I am curious what your thoughts are about a non custodial parent utilizing access and the custodial parent being open and encouraging of it, despite the fact that the non custodial is not contributing any cs, despite court order(and has the means to do so)?

Not all custodial parents are just looking for a buck and a lot of them are able to seperate the issues.

Janus 12-11-2012 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhMy (Post 118701)
It is clear that you are upset at having to pay cs. I am under the impression though that you do pay it.

I have 50/50 shared custody, so I only pay offset, but I pay that offset to a substantially wealthier household. I find the idea that this helps my children to be utterly ridiculous, but alas the best interests of my children are not considered in our family law system.

Quote:

I am curious what your thoughts are about a non custodial parent utilizing access and the custodial parent being open and encouraging of it, despite the fact that the non custodial is not contributing any cs, despite court order(and has the means to do so)?
I would be surprised.

That said, CS that is not paid will eventually be paid. Financial arrears cannot be escaped forever. Access "arrears" are generally never made up, and there is no enforcement agency to help those parents. A parent being denied support can get free help. A parent being denied access has to fight on their own dime.

The point is, the custodial parent can afford to be "nice", because the cash will come eventually. A non-custodial parent cannot be "nice", because not getting access eventually can lead to even less access.

As I said, family law has a laser-focus on cash, and very little else. Every now and then the courts fix an access problem, but it shouldn't come to that. Denying access should be tantamount to kidnapping, and treated as such. At the very least, I don't know why parents that deny access don't get their driving license suspended...


Quote:

Not all custodial parents are just looking for a buck and a lot of them are able the separate the issues.
Some are. In the case of non-abusive parents, the focus of a custody battle is almost always cash (or control... but cash is a good form of control)


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:53 PM.