The maximum contact principle is still there and still applies. The old wording and new wording are compared side-by-side.
The wording also got changed to untangle "custody" and "parenting time" within the same paragraph as they are two very different things. Now the section only speaks to how judges evaluate allocation of parenting time, which is to be based on the principle that a child should spend as much time with each parent as is in interest of child, provided it is safe for the child. You'll note it now references the term "parenting time" which replaced outdated terminology of "access". The clause now strictly addresses "parenting time".
Other than untangling references to "custody" and updating terminology, the only real change is that the phrase "take into consideration the willingness of each parent to facilitate such contact" part of the section got removed.
Under the previous wording, if Parent A lives in Toronto and Parent B lives in Barrie, does it make sense to have equal parenting time? The previous wording in law allowed both parents to argue that they had a strong "willingness and desire" to have the child in equal proportions to the other parent, despite it making very little sense and likely not in best interest of child when considering school and transportation. The previous law wording required judges to take these pleas into consideration when rendering a decision, whereas the new law wording shuts these scenarios down.
However, if Parent A and Parent B live in close proximity to one another so that it does not affect schooling or require inordinate transportation times, then the maximum contact principle applies where the child should have as much contact with both parents as possible, provided it is safe for the child.
|
03-01-2021, 07:51 PM
Similar Threads