Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Update on Bill C-422

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by ConcernenedStepMom78 View Post
    Mess this is a public forum and within, each person is allowed to voice their opinions.
    Please show me where i said otherwise. I simply changed my mind about responding to you because your writing is disjointed and you jump from one concept to another without any kind of transition that makes it easy to follow. You could try breaking your thoughts into individual points, give support to each point, and then show how each point relates to your conclusion. I've lost interest in reading because your solid blocks of random text have numbed my brain. You are of course welcome to keep writting. I'm bored of reading, and as is my right on an open forum I stated so. I would have simply deleted my post and left you alone but the forum software wouldn't allow that.

    Comment


    • #17
      Okay I am not here to argue I am only here to ask questions and give some different views, everyone is so quick to jump to their rebuttals, but are seeming to miss the points statements and questions.

      1. "Normal" defined more clearly is stable, every child has the right to a stable life, where they feel safe and comfortable. If two parens live witin a close proximity and can work together for the childs best interest where it does NOT interfere with providing 2 stable normal enviroments I am all for that.

      2. Perhaps at the age of 13 the court may interfere and allow the child the right to speak in court but I know for fact that at 14 the courts will typically not interfere at all there is a publication put out by Justice for Children and Youth called Age based Laws, that states as much, not to mention you can call your local police and inquire what happens if a child this ages chooses not to excercise access, we did and got the response that they will not interfere. My question is, is it right to force a child to have access if later on down the road it may cause anger problems or resentment where they may not wish to have access with that parent at all? Will parental alientaion be taken into account in some circumastances?

      3. How will this amendment affect the Children's Law Reform Act? has anyone read Wilson on Children and the Law?

      In closing is this bill to protect the rights of parents or the rights of children? Every Child had the right to have two loving parents this is true, however in some cases both parents having equal shared care is not practical, that is not saying the parent cannot love their child, to love a child means to be able to say I want what is best for my child, even if that means you have to make personal sacrifices, to give them the best.

      Comment


      • #18
        If it's not practical, YOU CAN SHOW THAT IN COURT and there WILL NOT BE SHARED PARENTING. Is that clear enough? The bill bill does not override factual evidence and if you had bothered to read the bloody thing YOU WOULD HAVE SEEN THAT FOR YOURSELF.

        What you are doing is arguing that the speed limit should be 50kph in a city unless otherwise posted, and then giving a list of reasons why it should not always be 50kph and you are ignoring the fact that this is how the law is already written, and then getting defencive about it.

        Why are listing example after example of instances why there should not be a shared parenting situation? The subtext here is that you are arguing against the bill, but you don't come right out and say this, you cloud your words with "I am just trying to understand".

        Read the friggin bill, and then you will understand.

        (d) establish that the interests of the child are best served through maximal ongoing pa- rental involvement with the child, and that the rebuttable presumption of equal parenting is the starting point for judicial deliberations,
        (5) The presumptions referred to in subsection (4) are rebutted if it is established that the best interests of the child would be substantially enhanced by allocating parenting time or parental responsibility other than equally.

        Comment


        • #19
          With my child, significant geographic distance prevails with Joint Custody.

          How's it working out for the child - fantastic. They are secure and stable and know that they have TWO parent's that care rather than just one.

          Much information available with Joint Custody and geographic distance at Canlii.

          Comment


          • #20
            Mess I did read the bill and I reading and re-reading different forums to understand it more clearly I hadnt even heard of this bill until a week ago so I am in my early stages of understanding it all, which is why I am asking for input.

            My concerns are that without some more clarifications in this bill will not keep families and children out of of an already backlogged corts system. Years of litigation and trials is certainly not in the best interest of the child either. With that said will ar can there be subsections defining or itemizing the grounds in which equal shared parenting are not in the childrens best interests? I did see very clearly that abuse and nglect are defined, what about the rest? The arguments of a children's "Habitual Residence" When one parent moves a resonable distance.....I think and feel the bill is on the right track and needs tweaking which is what I stated much earlier on in this forum.

            Comment


            • #21
              Velocity - Joint Custody yes but how is your access arranged, Joint custody is defined as two parent having equal legal say in their children's lives.

              Comment


              • #22
                step-parents under bill c-422

                Sorry... yes it includes step-parents...

                “relative” means, in relation to a child,

                (c) the spouse or common-law partner of either parent,

                (f) any other person who has the status of any of the persons referred to in paragraphs (a) to (e) according to the cultural norms of either parent;

                (which could mean a variety of people, based on the culture of the parents)


                This is a big part of why I support it...it gives those of us who have acted as parents as much right as the biological parent...if, worst case, a spouse should die...

                It will not, I suspect, make it to law here in Canada...unfortunately, there are too many people-sad to say, but custodial parents and lawyers, mainly-against it...and it is them who unite to bury recommendations like the Joint Senate Committee's more than 10 years ago

                Also, as much as parents are doing to highlight the issue...any and all petitions, etc become moot should we go to election before the next reading... Since it is a PMB, it would need to be re-introduced for the process to start all over again...and again....and again...

                Parents need to fight for this bill as much as they did for the FCS Guidelines and enforcement agencies...and I cannot see it happening in my children's childhood...

                Comment


                • #23
                  As well, Step...the process for a bill becoming law in Canada is a bit convoluted, which is why it takes so long for a bill to become law.

                  This one has been through 'first reading', may make it to "second reading' (although even that is unsure before an election), at which point it will be revised, debated and revised some more...this is nowhere near getting to the enacted law stage yet...

                  The public will have opportunity to input their thoughts on the bill, as well as at committee hearings if it makes it that far...

                  Funny how only the long-gun private member's bill was expedited by the conservative government, but not this one, that affects every canadian now and in the generations to come...

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by ConcernenedStepMom78 View Post
                    Velocity - Joint Custody yes but how is your access arranged, Joint custody is defined as two parent having equal legal say in their children's lives.
                    That would describe my child's parental regime in regards to Custodial decisions notwithstanding my child does not spend equal amounts of time with each parent. Any incident of custody can be apportioned off to any or both parents to make it Joint.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Thank You Inter, Now I understand more clearly. I do like what this bill proposes and I do hope that they build and grow on it. I think it is on the right track and coming form the US i have to say there is quite a bit of difference in the way laws are passed here. I have been in Canada a year and know more about Canadian Family Law than I do my fomer country's. I appreciate everyones input in helping me understand. I have kidsback in the states too and in comparing I think there should be combinations, the US has a long way to go in regard to family law as well.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Step....Canadian Law is based on the british model...so in looking for prior caselaw, etc....go to Britain and Australia and other commonwealth countries before doing US...unless you can find a great one from Texas or California!

                        Comment

                        Our Divorce Forums
                        Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                        Working...
                        X