Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Parenting Issues

Parenting Issues This forum is for discussing any of the parenting issues involved in your divorce, including parenting of step-children.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #21  
Old 12-31-2021, 10:02 AM
Brampton33 Brampton33 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 316
Brampton33 is on a distinguished road
Default

Agree 100% with PinkHouses. There is a proper process to follow if you have joint custody. This relates to a medical decision and must be jointly agreed upon. Most court orders have a Dispute Resolution clause outlining how to proceed where there is disagreement.

The first step is to establish that you are in disagreement on getting children vaccinated. If you are still at an impasse after trying to resolve the dispute on your own, most court orders instruct to seek aide from a mediator or parenting coordinator to see if concurrence can be reached. If that avenue does not bear fruit, then a motion can be filed.

Typically, as I have seen, it is the parent wanting the vaccination that files seeking a judge to side in their favour. Objecting parent would refute motion. The decisions I have seen have sided in favour of vaccination and awarded costs against the objecting parent. I am awaiting to see decisions that take away joint custody for demonstrating that the objecting parent is needlessly difficult, or at minimum that a change in custody be made where decisions for medical reasons rest with parent wanting vaccination.

In a joint custody situation, a parent cannot just unilaterally make decisions and say "I'm getting kids vaccinated, just try to stop me". Thats not the way to go about it. Follow the proper process and act reasonable/level-headed throughout the process.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-31-2021, 11:35 AM
Tayken's Avatar
Tayken Tayken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,474
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brampton33 View Post
Agree 100% with PinkHouses. There is a proper process to follow if you have joint custody. This relates to a medical decision and must be jointly agreed upon. Most court orders have a Dispute Resolution clause outlining how to proceed where there is disagreement.
I disagree. Janus is right. Anyone reading yours and other's comments should disregard. Proceed with vaccination. The Court will not go against public health. Any parent going against public health will lose. There is no risk to anything to have your child vaccinated.

Any court order punishing a parent who follows public health guidance that is punished for following it would be a signal and used by the anti-vax movement in a negative fashion. So no court will order anything against them self. Remember, the court is government... Just a different wing. Rarely do they order against each other. No would they issue anything that would impact public health.

Flu shots have been the test case for this... Search CanLII... Find me an order where a parent has any impact from getting their child a flu shot...

Janus is correct and providing the best advice here in my opinion.

In the midst of a pandemic, following government guidance and doing something safe for the children that is recommended by the government... Is doing the right thing. You can bypass "Start" and get children vaccinated. The anti-vax parent can, like Janus recommended, bring a motion after the fact or even prior when notified... The pro-vax parent will win and get their full costs paid.

https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/do...0onsc3971.html

Quote:
[1] COVID-19 has instantly made most of our “He Said/She Said” disputes sound pretty petty.

[2] We’re still in the midst of an existential crisis. Medically. Economically. Socially.

[3] But rather than brace together against the common enemy, parents are pounding on the family court door, begging us to open up so they can get a few more kicks in – as if a judge has the power to wake anyone from this pandemic nightmare.

[4] Business as Usual? Gone.

[5] Nonsense as Usual? Here to stay.
Feel free to be "that" parent that is Brampton33 and others saying you shouldn't get your child vaccinated and that the decision is "joint". Have fun explaining away that paragraph from case law with 24 citing's.

Not going to the court and against the door to get your child vaccinated because the other parent is anti-vax is nonsense. Let the anti-vax parent try and get their kicks in... they will fail horribly and in the pro-vax parent's favour.

GET YOUR CHILD VACCINATED!

Good Luck!
Tayken

Last edited by Tayken; 12-31-2021 at 11:58 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-31-2021, 11:59 AM
Brampton33 Brampton33 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 316
Brampton33 is on a distinguished road
Default

I never said to not get your kid vaccinated. I said that where joint custody is in place, one should not make unilateral decisions when the other parent disagrees. If you want kid vaccinated and other parent opposes, follow the proper process rather than unilaterally vaccinate kids against other parents wishes. Go to mediation, and if that does not work, file a motion.

Tayken is correct. The opposing parent will lose their rebuttal of the motion to have kids vaccinated. The court has been clear that it is favourable to vaccinate kids. And yes, courts are an arm of the government under the Ministry of Attorney General. So they will not rule against the government who is strongly directing people to get vaccinated.

All I was saying is that its best to vaccinate kids without making a unilateral decision in a joint custody regime. The kids will be vaccinated and there is a proper process to follow to do so.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-31-2021, 12:10 PM
arbortrail22 arbortrail22 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 82
arbortrail22 is on a distinguished road
Default

Having gone through the process, I would agree to just go get your child vaccinated. During the mediation, urgent motion, decision process- the anti-vax parent can do some crazy things- such as influence the child to the "dangers" of the vaccination, thus creating secondary issues regarding trust, choosing sides and placing the kids in the middle. Even 7/8 year old kids can become afraid of the vaccine if the right pressure is placed on the child. COVID vaccination is a black and white issue and unfortunately its not really something that is successfully mediated unless there are bargaining chips involved from either side.

I am dealing with significant parental alienation as the children believe the vaccination will kill them or have considerable impacts on their hearts. This is fed to the children through the kids meeting with a quack BC doctor and you tube videos from the other parent.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-31-2021, 12:42 PM
pinkHouses pinkHouses is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 579
pinkHouses has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Hey. I am playing both sides of the fence here trying to find the best balance and also considering other situations, not just vaccines.

To be clear because I know someone out there is simply going to be all "I can do what I want and don't need to tell the ex anything" when it comes to vaccines.

No parent should simply decide "I am going to get my child vaccinated" without consulting with the other parent first. I think I have most scenarios down:

Situation 1 (does not apply to COVID).
Parent 1: I got our kid vaccinated for X today.
Parent 2: You did not consult me on which version of the vaccine they should get I should have been part of that decision.

Situation 2.
Parent 1: I booked our kid to get a vaccination.
Parent 2: We should talk about this as there might be an issue with this.
Parent 1: Screw you and your concerns, I got them vaccinated today.
Parent 2: You forgot our kid had a diagnosis for myocarditis when they were a baby you idiot. There is a reason the court order says we are supposed to consult each other on medical items and give notice for appointments.

Parent 1: Well our kid is still alive so I was right to get them vaccinated.
Parent 2: Yeah, I do not think that is going to fly.

Situation 3.
Parent 1: I got our kid vaccinated today.
Parent 2: It would have been appropriate for you to get a medical assessment first because our child has a litany of issues that could potentially cause an issue. The pediatrician said to see them first.
Parent 1: I don't care about our kids pediatrician's opinion. I did what I wanted to do.
Parent 2: I don't think that is going to fly.

Situation 4.
Parent 1: I got our kid vaccinated for X tonight, sorry for the late notice.
Parent 2: I also got our kid vaccinated for X this morning, sorry I for the late notice.
Parent 1 and 2: We are both f*cking idiots.

Situation 5:
Parent 1: I got our kid vaccinated for X today.
Parent 2: I got our kid vaccinated for Y last week and those different vaccinations are supposed to be 4 weeks apart.
Parent 1 and 2: We are f*cking idiots.

Just work together with the ex. It is better for the kid.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-01-2022, 03:06 AM
Janus's Avatar
Janus Janus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,731
Janus will become famous soon enoughJanus will become famous soon enough
Default

Some random case law, doesn't necessarily help my viewpoint

https://canlii.ca/t/jlbcg

Quote:
[29]....In a separated family, it is incumbent on separated parents to have each other’s consent before such parenting decisions are made, especially when, in this case, Ms. Khalil is the authorized decision-maker, a role that Mr. Hasan subverted when he unilaterally arranged for M. to receive her first vaccination shot in the face of Ms. Khalil’s lack of consent to same.

[30] Mr. Hasan’s conduct since the Covid-19 pandemic, in swearing a false affidavit before the Court in April 2020, and in arranging for M. to receive her first vaccination shot without Ms. Khalil’s consent, demonstrates that he is unable, in my view, to place M.’s needs and best interests ahead of his own need to secure his own plans. This prioritizing of his own interests affects his ability to care for and meet M.’s needs, and his ability and willingness to communicate and cooperate with Ms. Khalil, on matters affecting M.
So, non-custodial parent (or whatever the new term is, I always forget) got the vaccination. Court used that as a partial excuse to stop him from going on an international trip, but it is very possible he was not going to be allowed to go anyway.

Vaccinating parent did not face any other consequences though.

I still think I'm right, but I felt this case law was possibly relevant.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-01-2022, 06:44 PM
rockscan rockscan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 6,732
rockscan will become famous soon enoughrockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

Ah the naivety of the dispute resolution clause. Note to litigants, it doesnt always work and in cases where a childs health and well being is at risk, dispute resolution is completely ineffective. If one parent refuses to get their kid vaccinated then the other parent should go and do it. A simple please advise if you plan to get the children vaccinated otherwise I will take them during my parenting time and then go. To me this is a no brainer. And leaning on a dispute resolution clause is not applicable in this situation.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-02-2022, 12:14 AM
mamabear1234 mamabear1234 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 16
mamabear1234 is on a distinguished road
Default

You are aware that the chance of death from covid for a healthy child is statistically 0% right? And that the safety data is limited?

It's right in the government document:

"The guiding consideration for COVID-19 pediatric vaccine recommendations should be whether vaccination is in children's best interests. Decisions regarding pediatric COVID-19 vaccination programs should not only evaluate the direct and indirect benefits and risks of vaccination in this age group, but also consider principles such as the precautionary principle, equity, trust, and proportionality. There are multiple and intersecting uncertainties at play, including those related to the impact of COVID-19 on children's health; the long-term effectiveness of vaccination in this age group; potential safety concerns (e.g., uncertainty around the risk of myocarditis and pericarditis); and the future progression of the pandemic, including the emergence of variants of concern. While it is not justified to vaccinate children only to benefit others, the indirect, population-level benefits of vaccination can also benefit children.

The overall safety and effectiveness data are limited for children. While it is justifiable to make recommendations based on available data for children 5-11 years of age, including following the dosing intervals associated with the clinical trial data, the precautionary principle also justifies taking action under conditions of scientific uncertainty to mitigate vaccine-related risks, including through active post-market surveillance. This includes using data available from other age groups and applying vaccination principles.

Generally, a vaccination program is justified if its anticipated benefits outweigh its potential risks. Children aged 5-11 years are unlikely to be deemed capable of consenting to vaccination, and decisions related to their vaccination will likely be made by parents or guardians. Given the short-term uncertainties surrounding pediatric vaccination at this time, children and their parents or guardians should be supported and respected in their decisions regarding COVID-19 vaccinations for the child, whatever decisions they make, and should not be stigmatised for accepting, or not accepting, the vaccination offer."

https://www.canada.ca/en/public-heal...years-age.html

It's pretty much an accepted fact that kids aren't at risk from covid, they're just at risk from the lockdown measures. The reason for vaccinating children is mainly to benefit society as a whole. I guess it depends on your view of the ethics of that and whether it's in their best interests on an individual level.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-02-2022, 02:44 AM
Janus's Avatar
Janus Janus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,731
Janus will become famous soon enoughJanus will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mamabear1234 View Post
You are aware that the chance of death from covid for a healthy child is statistically 0% right? And that the safety data is limited?
Are you aware that the chance of death from the covid vaccine for a healthy child is statistically 0%, right? And that the data on covid infection is limited?

I'm just kidding, kids have actually died from covid, not a single kid has died from the vaccine.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-02-2022, 08:02 PM
pinkHouses pinkHouses is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 579
pinkHouses has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

I remember our pediatrician. Your kids have zero to worry about from COVID, send them to school, don't worry about a thing. A couple of months later as the vaccine is available to them "get them vaccinated now" for their safety. Not the best source of info.

As far as kids are concerned, it isn't about the dying. It is about the damage. COVID can do it, so can the vaccine.
Doesn't matter, for now in Family Court you don't get to argue against any of the vaccines successfully. Maybe next year.
Reply With Quote
Reply


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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Covid: filing unsworn forms Sugg53 Divorce & Family Law 4 05-14-2021 05:04 PM
Divorce due to Covid Shawkid Divorce & Family Law 1 03-18-2021 04:03 PM
Refusing daycare during covid Googlelawstudent Parenting Issues 7 06-06-2020 01:19 PM
Can people update child support orders during covid? pinkmorganite Divorce & Family Law 0 06-04-2020 09:09 AM
Covid - Access Issues - Shoe on the other foot Abba435 Divorce & Family Law 15 04-10-2020 08:05 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:15 AM.