My lawyer happens to be working a bit today on holiday Monday and called me back in response to my email. I relayed to him the situation of last Thursday, as well as some of the comments on this forum about what people think I should and should not do. First of all, here is what the court order actually says about pick up and drop off:
1. The Claimant will have parenting time with the child D2 (the "Child") on an interim and without prejudice basis, each Wednesday from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. and each Thursday from 12:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., with pick up and drop off by the Claimant at the Respondent's residence.
I repeated to him that usually (not always), this arrangement works fine and both parents respect it. I explained that Wednesday I went to the door and Thursday I was told by the mother and later the grandmother that I am not welcome at the home. I'll get into the issue of cigarette butts in a moment. First a summary re: pick up and drop offs.
- The mother should not be making comments like "you are not welcome here". That is alienating behaviour. Even if that were legally true, she should take you aside and have the discussion or put it in the email. It is a violation of another order restraining her from making derogatory comments
- The grandmother has absolutely zero say in it. A third party can be found in contempt of court for interfering with an order. She could argue it shouldn't be at her house but without a change in circumstances, or proof that it's not in the child's best interests, the time has passed for her to make that argument. If she put it in an email and not in front of the child, it's rudeness and not illegal
- "the Respondent's residence" means her home, where she resides. She does not reside on the front lawn, the sidewalk in front of her home, or down the street from her home. Unless you both agree by consent to modify the "residence" part, which you are both free to do of course, then one or both of you would be in violation of the order.
- He pointed out that I had requested the wording be "at a mutually convenient location". The Respondent insisted at the hearing it be "at her Residence". She has reiterated this in writing several times with her promises that "no words will be exchanged at the handover".
- I told him that the mother had never objected to the doorbell ringing, but that some of the posters on the forum did. He said (paraphrase), "the doorbell was placed there by the family so that people who are authorised to be on the property can make contact when they are inside. Sounds like that's what you did. Stop taking advice from people with an axe to grind on forums".
- Keep doing what I am doing and keep that tape recorder rolling. Tape recording without consent, as long as the person recording is a party to the conversation, is perfectly legal in BC.
- If she politely requests I meet down the street, I can consent. Be careful of following barking orders to pacify a high-conflict ex because it sets a bad example for children.
- If the grandmother requests/demands I meet down the street, tell her I need to make an arrangement with the mother and the court order says at her home. Do not argue, drop the matter. If she persists, ignore.
Cigarette Butts
- As a parent you have the right to say anything you want about anything pertaining to your child, whether it's in a private home or a public facility
- You don't have the right to peer in the windows as someone suggested on this forum. However if something dangerous is appearing through an open window you can and should comment if you want to
- The only restriction on your free speech is being condescending or abusive to the mother. Be mindful of tone of voice and timing. She was already upset about you being at the door, so save the cigarette butt conversation for later, if you can. I know you were surprised that she was upset you were there, since you were also there 12 hours before. Maybe she had forgotten the cigarette butts and was feeling guilty? Classic miscommunication
- Photographs are ok. Definitely document any dangers you see. If it's a one time, thing, you don't need to worry about it. If you see it repeatedly, you'll be glad you took the first ones.
- Don't send photographs to her or her lawyer unless a) you think you can make a difference in their actions (possible but not likely), or b) you are making a specific demand that action needs to be taken or legal/CS action will be taken.
- Do send photographs as a positive response to a negative charge. For example when she harasses you by continuous texts during access visits (this happens a lot), feel free to send her a picture of the child playing happily where she is, and save any sarcastic comments
- Continue to answer any and all reasonable questions she has for you about: home visitors, hazards on the floor, locations where you will be, diet, car seats, safety issues, teething problems, ANYTHING that acknowledges her as an equal parent. Make calm and wise judgments between genuine parental concern and harassment. Right to privacy is limited when you are caring for an infant and there is a custody dispute.
He didn't want to get into the forum comments too much but he said that picking up and dropping off my daughter at her mother's home can never be considered trespassing given the court order. He cautioned me to simply block or ignore anyone suggesting such a thing.
He said commentary that me sending off the photos about the ashtray were provocative and rude were more accurate, that next time I should keep the photo private. However, he did encourage me to continue discussing any concerns I have about the child and her environs, with her mother. He said that an ashtray in a play area is absolutely a legitimate concern for any parent regardless of where it takes place, and being in her private home (or outside of it in public view) doesn't negate my rights as a parent.
He cautioned me about time and place, saying he believes they will probably now remove the ashtray from that area where the public can see it, at least, but that when I said it in the morning, she took it as a personal attack and decided to leave the hazard there all day to spite me. He said that I was well within my rights to mention and ask it to be removed, it especially since it was visible outside the home and in a location where I am fully authorised to be by law.
He finally said that saying a child will never likely choke or die from something is not a legitimate response. He pointed out how we use car seats, electrical outlet covers, buy insurance, keep bleach, cigarettes and other poison off the floor, keep liquor bottles off the floor, use safety caps on certain products, and all sorts of safety things to protect our children, not because we expect those things to happen, but because it is being a responsible parent.
1. The Claimant will have parenting time with the child D2 (the "Child") on an interim and without prejudice basis, each Wednesday from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. and each Thursday from 12:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., with pick up and drop off by the Claimant at the Respondent's residence.
I repeated to him that usually (not always), this arrangement works fine and both parents respect it. I explained that Wednesday I went to the door and Thursday I was told by the mother and later the grandmother that I am not welcome at the home. I'll get into the issue of cigarette butts in a moment. First a summary re: pick up and drop offs.
- The mother should not be making comments like "you are not welcome here". That is alienating behaviour. Even if that were legally true, she should take you aside and have the discussion or put it in the email. It is a violation of another order restraining her from making derogatory comments
- The grandmother has absolutely zero say in it. A third party can be found in contempt of court for interfering with an order. She could argue it shouldn't be at her house but without a change in circumstances, or proof that it's not in the child's best interests, the time has passed for her to make that argument. If she put it in an email and not in front of the child, it's rudeness and not illegal
- "the Respondent's residence" means her home, where she resides. She does not reside on the front lawn, the sidewalk in front of her home, or down the street from her home. Unless you both agree by consent to modify the "residence" part, which you are both free to do of course, then one or both of you would be in violation of the order.
- He pointed out that I had requested the wording be "at a mutually convenient location". The Respondent insisted at the hearing it be "at her Residence". She has reiterated this in writing several times with her promises that "no words will be exchanged at the handover".
- I told him that the mother had never objected to the doorbell ringing, but that some of the posters on the forum did. He said (paraphrase), "the doorbell was placed there by the family so that people who are authorised to be on the property can make contact when they are inside. Sounds like that's what you did. Stop taking advice from people with an axe to grind on forums".
- Keep doing what I am doing and keep that tape recorder rolling. Tape recording without consent, as long as the person recording is a party to the conversation, is perfectly legal in BC.
- If she politely requests I meet down the street, I can consent. Be careful of following barking orders to pacify a high-conflict ex because it sets a bad example for children.
- If the grandmother requests/demands I meet down the street, tell her I need to make an arrangement with the mother and the court order says at her home. Do not argue, drop the matter. If she persists, ignore.
Cigarette Butts
- As a parent you have the right to say anything you want about anything pertaining to your child, whether it's in a private home or a public facility
- You don't have the right to peer in the windows as someone suggested on this forum. However if something dangerous is appearing through an open window you can and should comment if you want to
- The only restriction on your free speech is being condescending or abusive to the mother. Be mindful of tone of voice and timing. She was already upset about you being at the door, so save the cigarette butt conversation for later, if you can. I know you were surprised that she was upset you were there, since you were also there 12 hours before. Maybe she had forgotten the cigarette butts and was feeling guilty? Classic miscommunication
- Photographs are ok. Definitely document any dangers you see. If it's a one time, thing, you don't need to worry about it. If you see it repeatedly, you'll be glad you took the first ones.
- Don't send photographs to her or her lawyer unless a) you think you can make a difference in their actions (possible but not likely), or b) you are making a specific demand that action needs to be taken or legal/CS action will be taken.
- Do send photographs as a positive response to a negative charge. For example when she harasses you by continuous texts during access visits (this happens a lot), feel free to send her a picture of the child playing happily where she is, and save any sarcastic comments
- Continue to answer any and all reasonable questions she has for you about: home visitors, hazards on the floor, locations where you will be, diet, car seats, safety issues, teething problems, ANYTHING that acknowledges her as an equal parent. Make calm and wise judgments between genuine parental concern and harassment. Right to privacy is limited when you are caring for an infant and there is a custody dispute.
He didn't want to get into the forum comments too much but he said that picking up and dropping off my daughter at her mother's home can never be considered trespassing given the court order. He cautioned me to simply block or ignore anyone suggesting such a thing.
He said commentary that me sending off the photos about the ashtray were provocative and rude were more accurate, that next time I should keep the photo private. However, he did encourage me to continue discussing any concerns I have about the child and her environs, with her mother. He said that an ashtray in a play area is absolutely a legitimate concern for any parent regardless of where it takes place, and being in her private home (or outside of it in public view) doesn't negate my rights as a parent.
He cautioned me about time and place, saying he believes they will probably now remove the ashtray from that area where the public can see it, at least, but that when I said it in the morning, she took it as a personal attack and decided to leave the hazard there all day to spite me. He said that I was well within my rights to mention and ask it to be removed, it especially since it was visible outside the home and in a location where I am fully authorised to be by law.
He finally said that saying a child will never likely choke or die from something is not a legitimate response. He pointed out how we use car seats, electrical outlet covers, buy insurance, keep bleach, cigarettes and other poison off the floor, keep liquor bottles off the floor, use safety caps on certain products, and all sorts of safety things to protect our children, not because we expect those things to happen, but because it is being a responsible parent.
Comment