Ottawa Divorce .com Forums

iona6656 · #11 05-25-2022, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pinkHouses

If my neighbor assaults me, I end up with injuries like r severe bruising the Justice system ends up directing me to a peace bond against them that keeps them 100m away and that lasts a couple of years. If I am threatened with violence that is about the best I can do too.
I can't get them evicted or anything.

For whatever reason one party was tight with money and it was an unequal relationship leadership wise (overbearing) and some one "likely" gave the other a bruise over the eye.

Result: loosing your kids and also the financial consequences that go with that forever.

My ex hit me, I even took a photo of the damage and they did other things to like instigation of verbal confrontation that sometimes I must have feel for. I never thought that it could result in me getting my kids full-time; it would seem like cheating.

This and the "overbearing statement" is what I am focusing on :

I am not grasping why supervised exchanges and restraining orders were not enough here or even tried. Maybe it was because the court found the aggressor also conspired with others to manipulate the court to get their kids previously? Will someone help me understand?

A therapist. A therapist will help you understand.

Cause clearly you don't get it.

Assault is not IPV. IPV is something different- it's more insidious. Seriously go google "why is domestic violence bad?"- I'm not being facetious.

The fact that you put quotations around "likely" is evidence that you don't understand.

Supervised exchanges, restraining orders- if you want to talk about best interests of the child- that isn't it.

The courts are saying "you cannot be a super shitty violent and controlling person and also co-parent effectively". They're saying "you don't make good decisions. And as a consequence the parent who doesn't lose their temper, who isn't violent and controlling is the parent who gets to make more of the decisions for the kids".

What you don't get is that a person who commits these acts on an ongoing basis- who has a pattern of abuse, isn't a great parent. The courts are starting to agree- like it or not.

pinkHouses · #12 05-25-2022, 05:25 PM

I put "likely" in quotes because I took it right from the decision, that is what the judge stated.

The ruling didn't say they were a "super shitty violent and controlling parent" or anything you quote. You made that up.
The judge did use the word overbearing and I run into those people everyday.

I fail to see the ruling saying anything about co-parenting. They virtually took the kids away from one parent by allowing the other to move the kids 1000Km away. Where is this co-parenting thing you are on about?

I fail to see how your response is reasonable as it is made up of fictitious quotes, fabricated statements and arguments. Maybe you read the wrong ruling.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Case Law, Case Conference and Mediation	Free-spirit	Divorce & Family Law	5	09-30-2012 09:55 PM
Case Conference	first timer	Divorce & Family Law	6	02-14-2012 05:21 PM
Costs in Bad Faith	mom2three	Financial Issues	1	10-24-2011 04:19 PM
Postponing Case Conference	frustrateddad1970	Divorce & Family Law	2	06-18-2011 11:38 AM
No doc been served from Respondent for case conference	nick2009	Divorce & Family Law	6	01-22-2010 08:38 PM

Ottawa Divorce .com Forums

User CP

New posts

Advertising

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

User Name
Password