Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Divorce & Family Law

Divorce & Family Law This forum is for discussing any of the legal issues involved in your divorce.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #21  
Old 10-16-2019, 12:15 PM
YYC_SingleDad YYC_SingleDad is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 16
YYC_SingleDad is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by iona6656 View Post
You may want to consider getting some counselling or therapy for your anger at your ex for the abandonment issues with the kids. This is how you feel towards her- and has nothing to do with your kids.

That is good advice, I do feel that I should talk to a professional about my feelings when she left the kids.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-16-2019, 02:07 PM
calvinfive calvinfive is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 32
calvinfive is infamous around these partscalvinfive is infamous around these parts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockscan View Post
You aren’t paying cs to your ex. You are paying to equalize the households. CS is for your kids. They should have equal living situations at both homes.
They should. But we all know that is never the case when child support is being paid. It is faaaar from equal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockscan View Post
So what if your ex moved out into a small apartment with little room? Her financial situation obviously dictated that. She worked herself out and moved closer to the kids into bigger accommodations so she could spend time with them. Maybe it was about money maybe not. She wants more time with her kids. She should be given that chance to do so and you should be doing everything you can to ensure the kids have as much access to BOTH parents REGARDLESS of the costs to you.
Few points.

1. This is clearly decisions mother is making due to the costs to her.
2. The law does not state kids must have as much access to BOTH parents. I have been wanting to respond to your thinking on that by case law. Specifically that the maximum contact principle doesn't mean exactly 50/50. In fact, it doesn't even mean 60/40.

Quote:
There is no absolute rule that there must be maximum contact between a child and each of its parents. If there was such a rule, all children would see their time equally divided between their parents.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-16-2019, 02:12 PM
rockscan rockscan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 4,703
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calvinfive View Post
They should. But we all know that is never the case when child support is being paid. It is faaaar from equal.







Few points.



1. This is clearly decisions mother is making due to the costs to her.

2. The law does not state kids must have as much access to BOTH parents. I have been wanting to respond to your thinking on that by case law. Specifically that the maximum contact principle doesn't mean exactly 50/50. In fact, it doesn't even mean 60/40.


Hey guys...I think tunnelight is back!!!
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-16-2019, 02:14 PM
calvinfive calvinfive is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 32
calvinfive is infamous around these partscalvinfive is infamous around these parts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockscan View Post
Hey guys...I think tunnelight is back!!!
https://youtu.be/ZbytR2avo-0?t=22
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-16-2019, 02:58 PM
calvinfive calvinfive is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 32
calvinfive is infamous around these partscalvinfive is infamous around these parts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by YYC_SingleDad View Post
Thanks for your feedback and the points you mentioned. When she first moved out she retained a lawyer only for property issues and only hired a lawyer in March of this year to discuss parenting. The ex wanted to moved to shared parenting right away and I did not agree as I wanted a transition into shared parenting and overnight access. We agreed in June that she would have Sunday overnights and would see the children on Wednesday and Fridays for dinner. The case then moved to EICC in September and the justice put in a interim parenting order which is every other weekend and a Thursday on her off weekend. The judge is the one that recommended that a hearing take place in the Spring 2020.


That is a good suggestion on 50/50 with child support to remain the same (her paying about $150 a month for two children).
It sounds like you know what you are doing and the courts really didn't want to just give her 50/50 back after she moved back in after she reduced her parenting time like that.

Status quo is in your favour, courts generally don't like to disrupt status quos and I think this is going to be an uphill battle for her and the onus is on her - she has to prove that the change she is seeking is warranted and that it will be in and will serve the child's best interests.

You shouldn't argue the child support issue like that. I was just suggesting that if the mother's real desires were to have more time, she would just ask for more time, and wouldn't make a big issue of $150 a month. Her lawyer has motivated her and given her flapping wings she wouldn't have to pay anymore, and you would have to pay if she wins 50/50 and offset. My part here is to inform you that it won't be an easy battle for her to win 50/50 back after she walked away, and that offset is not automatic. She could still be ordered to pay you $150/month if she ever gets 50/50. Don't say a word about this to her lawyer.. just something to keep in the back of your mind when interacting with her lawyer. The focus of any negotions and discussions should be access. Should it be increased? I sit warranted? If so, to what amount and why? In what increments? Once those details have been worked out, then you guys could discuss child support. Actually, backtrack here, while having these negotiations, you should be ensuring that she is presently paying the correct guideline child support amount. But if it was me, I would keep my mouth zip and not say anything about child support at this time and only focus on access/parenting times.

I would say odds are in your favour unless you or the courts have explicitly stated or implied that you/courts WILL give her 50/50 if she meets certain conditions or demonstrates a requirement by the review hearing
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-16-2019, 03:57 PM
iona6656 iona6656 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 738
iona6656 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calvinfive View Post
1. This is clearly decisions mother is making due to the costs to her.
You don't know that. You don't know her motivations. What you know is the OPs side of the story.

Quote:
2. The law does not state kids must have as much access to BOTH parents. I have been wanting to respond to your thinking on that by case law. Specifically that the maximum contact principle doesn't mean exactly 50/50. In fact, it doesn't even mean 60/40.
Funny how you pick and choose this principle based on whether it's a dad wanting 50/50 or a mom wanting 50/50.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-16-2019, 06:24 PM
calvinfive calvinfive is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 32
calvinfive is infamous around these partscalvinfive is infamous around these parts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by iona6656 View Post
Funny how you pick and choose this principle based on whether it's a dad wanting 50/50 or a mom wanting 50/50.
My stance is firm. Maximum contact principle doesn't automatically mean 50/50. Whether you like it, or not.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-17-2019, 04:21 PM
YYC_SingleDad YYC_SingleDad is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 16
YYC_SingleDad is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calvinfive View Post

Status quo is in your favour, courts generally don't like to disrupt status quos and I think this is going to be an uphill battle for her and the onus is on her - she has to prove that the change she is seeking is warranted and that it will be in and will serve the child's best interests.

Would there be any onus on me to prove that the status quo is working very well and that the children are doing well?


Quote:
Originally Posted by calvinfive View Post
I would say odds are in your favour unless you or the courts have explicitly stated or implied that you/courts WILL give her 50/50 if she meets certain conditions or demonstrates a requirement by the review hearing

It only states that a review hearing will be scheduled in Spring 2020, with a move towards shared parenting and we are allowed two witnesses each. There are no certain conditions that in the interim order that need to be met.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 10-17-2019, 04:27 PM
Berner_Faith Berner_Faith is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,325
Berner_Faith will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by YYC_SingleDad View Post
Would there be any onus on me to prove that the status quo is working very well and that the children are doing well?





It only states that a review hearing will be scheduled in Spring 2020, with a move towards shared parenting and we are allowed two witnesses each. There are no certain conditions that in the interim order that need to be met.


So you’re order states you’re to move towards shared parenting? Your only issue you have with shared parenting is you’d have to pay her CS. You’d be okay with 60-40 but not 50-50. You haven’t provided and reasons why she should t get shared parenting. Yes you may have status quo but with the wording of your order “moving towards shared parenting” it sounds like status quo isn’t going to hold much weight


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 10-17-2019, 04:30 PM
YYC_SingleDad YYC_SingleDad is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 16
YYC_SingleDad is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Berner_Faith View Post
So you’re order states you’re to move towards shared parenting? Your only issue you have with shared parenting is you’d have to pay her CS. You’d be okay with 60-40 but not 50-50. You haven’t provided and reasons why she should t get shared parenting. Yes you may have status quo but with the wording of your order “moving towards shared parenting” it sounds like status quo isn’t going to hold much weight


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for the reply and your thoughts. I do have reasons why shared parenting may not work in our case but I will not get into as I see how heated discussion can get on this forum.
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 On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Best Interests of Children: An Evidence- Based Approach WorkingDAD Divorce & Family Law 13 01-12-2013 09:15 PM
Joint Physical Custody: Smart Solution or Problematic Plan? WorkingDAD Parenting Issues 19 09-17-2012 07:38 AM
Examining resistance to joint custody first timer Parenting Issues 29 03-21-2011 09:37 AM
Joint custody - questions & answers (US) first timer Parenting Issues 0 03-20-2011 01:07 AM
How to proceed CatvsLion Divorce & Family Law 9 04-25-2006 11:10 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:12 AM.