PTSD and Costs for Treatment

[mom2three]

Caranna:

You may well be dealing with an entire area of law, tort law. Essentially what you are asking for is damages as a result of his actions.

This is the most recent case involving a tort action combined with a family law application:

CanLII - 2013 ONSC 1626 (CanLII)

Good read and it is an awesome decision from which to explore other cases where precedents have been established.

[hadenough]

Thank you mom2three,

The above case-law should be re-posted on some of the DV threads on this forum.

[caranna]

you know what the worse part is, I had someone tell me that when I was being abused (she was still living with her abuser so hard to take advice from her) to leave the man but I didnt listen. I felt angry at her, how dare she judge me or my partner at the time.

I was still in protection mode, lied about the bruises just to protect him. I think I fell off my bike quite alot (that was my excuse). After all was said and done and the truth finally came out I had one person say to me that no one believed I was that bad at bike riding. People were very supportive.

SOS, the abused woman who advised you to leave yet still was living with her abuser was in a semi-denial mode about her own situation...not completely blinded but sufficiently so that she stayed for awhile. I hope she left before it was too late. I'm so glad you left. Thank you for your support.

[caranna]

Caranna:

You may well be dealing with an entire area of law, tort law. Essentially what you are asking for is damages as a result of his actions.

This is the most recent case involving a tort action combined with a family law application:

CanLII - 2013 ONSC 1626 (CanLII)

Good read and it is an awesome decision from which to explore other cases where precedents have been established.

Mom2three, that appears to be an excellent reference. I will print it out and read it thoroughly. Thank you so much!

[caranna]

I hate being pessimistic but I really don't see how you can prove that your mental illness was caused by your ex. Talk to your lawyer and do a lot of research.

Also feel free to write about it here. My very first post here was I HAVE DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY. Its a taboo subject but I don't hide it, I deal with it. No one will judge you.

From my understanding of tort law, I don't think you need to "prove" a wrong.

About being judged: It is not about depression or anxiety, which is nothing to be ashamed of if you have it. The judging I have cautioned about is not to blame the victim.

I also doubt I will be awarded damages in a tort suit, but it is worthwhile considering, even though I'm principally seeking costs awarded for the counselling I require as a result of the abuse suffered.

[murphyslaw]

Tort law does not have the same level of proof as in Criminal Law.Quite simply it is on balance of probabilities,50%+1.Trying to get treatment for PTSD or OSD would be common enough down this route, I believe.PTSD can be quite crippling so I hope this works out for you .Its unfair that the cost of being a victim, is borne by the victim in most cases.

[hadenough]

"Its unfair that the cost of being a victim, is borne by the victim in most cases."

Welcome to Canada. A haven (imo) for criminals.

[mom2three]

From my understanding of tort law, I don't think you need to "prove" a wrong.

About being judged: It is not about depression or anxiety, which is nothing to be ashamed of if you have it. The judging I have cautioned about is not to blame the victim.

I also doubt I will be awarded damages in a tort suit, but it is worthwhile considering, even though I'm principally seeking costs awarded for the counselling I require as a result of the abuse suffered.

That's not necessarily true. There are different categories of torts: intentional or unintentional.

If the tort is intentional (assault and battery are intentional torts), the claimant bears the burden of establishing the required elements of the tort; that is, is doen't matter whether the claimant 'suffered' any harm, only that the elements of the tort existed.

With an unintentional tort(negligence), the big difference is that the claimant must establish that some sort of loss was suffered.

It would depend what claim was being brought forth.

[caranna]

Yes, Murphyslaw. The cost of being a victim is very high. Not only emotionally, physically and spiritually, but financially as well. And I have spent quite some time having to deal with feelings of righteous anger at him, and also at myself. I finally realized that a lot of that anger was self-directed. When the veil causing my blindness was finally lifted, I became very angry at myself for tolerating and hiding his abuse for such a long time.

Hadenough, I was his haven.

[caranna]

That's not necessarily true. There are different categories of torts: intentional or unintentional.

If the tort is intentional (assault and battery are intentional torts), the claimant bears the burden of establishing the required elements of the tort; that is, is doen't matter whether the claimant 'suffered' any harm, only that the elements of the tort existed.

With an unintentional tort(negligence), the big difference is that the claimant must establish that some sort of loss was suffered.

It would depend what claim was being brought forth.

Thanks for differentiating the types of torts. Very much appreciated.

[caranna]

Caranna:

You may well be dealing with an entire area of law, tort law. Essentially what you are asking for is damages as a result of his actions.

This is the most recent case involving a tort action combined with a family law application:

CanLII - 2013 ONSC 1626 (CanLII)

Good read and it is an awesome decision from which to explore other cases where precedents have been established.

I read through this case today and found it very informative and interesting. It should be required reading for every family lawyer.

One of the things that stood out was on page 7, under the heading "The Law"

There may even be systemic discouragement. Over the years our family court system has worked so hard to get away from blame and recrimination - by discouraging "inflammatory" affidavits in favour of case management; by telling conflicted parents to focus more on the future than the past; by promoting conciliation and collaborative dispute resolution; by granting "no fault" divorces.

We have promoted a misconception: that fault never matters." ( last three words originally emphasized in italics).

This is but a small portion of the writing.

Thanks again, mom2three. This case document may well be a ground-breaking one.

[caranna]

I found this case very helpful, referred to me by Mom2three:

CanLII - 2013 ONSC 1626 (CanLII)

Best wishes!

[caranna]

^^^I didn't intend to dig up my thread, just to reply to SoccerMom73's earlier one. My error, or perhaps it is for the best.

[Janibel]

''We have promoted a misconception: that fault never matters."

This is exactly why I am so frustrated with family law in this country. How the **** could fault not be considered when a spouse's violence causes the other spouse to lose work due to injuries and/or mental anguish, not to mention the long term issues associated with PTSD?

Same argument for a husband who's wife is 'adultering' right, left and sideways and the poor buggar has to pay spousal support to her until he is pushing daisies? It boggles the mind!

By adopting no fault standards we are disregarding the whole concept of accountability between spouses. Family law is not about justice or even fairness for that matter, it usually boils down to who can invest in the better lawyer.

[frustratedwithex]

A court of law is not the place for this. Family court doesn't care if you had an affair, and they shouldn't.

A divorce requires division of property and support for kids. Those two things are not decided by who slept with who. No one should have to prove that they want a divorce.