View Single Post
  #5  
Old 07-19-2011, 02:33 PM
CatvsLion CatvsLion is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 124
CatvsLion is on a distinguished road
Default

The problem is I don't think I'm at the settlement conference as of yet... first I would have to do a motion.

The OCL told me that a judge might look negatively on the fact that she's agreeing with the OCL recommendations already (just with another intereview with another councilor with my daughter (7yrs old) to see how she's managing with the new time)

My x won't agree without that 'trial period'. The OCL has already ok'd this somewhat in views on settling the matters as our case isn't that high conflict.

We've had a case conference where the judge basically ragged me out saying 'good luck' with trying to get my weeknight access back. This is when we requested OCL invovlement - and they got involved.

I'm worried on going back to court as I'm 0-2 in case conferences. But everytime a physchologist/social worker/ocl etc get involved and see the 'whole picture' I'm successful.

Thinking aloud:
- bite and go through a trial period and hopefully it gets settled after a councelor says it's ok for my daughter.
- file the motion and get a temporary order in hopes the judge will get her to a settlement.
- file a motion a get scouffed at again - at which point I don't know what would happen as the OCL gave me a rave report and bitches her out in the report.
- also not sure what avenue they would take if we filed the motion - as from their reply to the OCL and us saying we would be filing a motion; they said:

It would be ill advised and we wouldn't be successful.

i) the law is clear the custodial status quo will not be changed on an interim custody motion in the absence of compelling reasons indicating the necessity of a change to meet the children's best interest.

ii) an accessor's recommendations out not to be acted upon without a full record and trial except in exceptional circumstances where immediate action is mandated by teh report. and our case does not meet 'exceptional circumstances' to rely on the report at a motion.