Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Child support payor with no knowledge of child

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by SingingDad View Post
    If B is required to provide the information it is not an option. If the requirement is in the way of a court order B is in contempt and there can be serious repercussions to those who are found in contempt of court.
    HAHAHAHAHA! In dreams.

    It sounds like parent A has no role in the child's life (making no assumptions on the reason). So the fact that A has no information about the child has no effect on the child. So the courts probably wouldn't care about the lack of info. The child's best interests are not affected.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by dinkyface View Post
      HAHAHAHAHA! In dreams.

      It sounds like parent A has no role in the child's life (making no assumptions on the reason). So the fact that A has no information about the child has no effect on the child. So the courts probably wouldn't care about the lack of info. The child's best interests are not affected.
      from the 1991 UN Convention on the rights of the child:

      "Article 7
      All children have the right to a legally registered name, and nationality. Also the right to know and, as far as possible, to be cared for by their parents."

      I would argue that if A has no contact with the child not only is the child's best interests are not being served, but the child's rights are being violated.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by SingingDad View Post
        I think talking about "what if B doesn't comply?" isn't the way to approach the situation. If B IS REQUIRED to disclose certain information then the situation is solvable.

        SD
        I've been searching Canlii for cases where one parent was required (as in stated in a court order) to provide ongoing disclosure about child's health, education etc., didn't, and was successfully hammered with contempt of court -- haven't had any luck so far. Theoratically speaking, contempt for something like this is an option, but in reality, is it a VIABLE recourse??

        Originally posted by dinkyface View Post
        It sounds like parent A has no role in the child's life (making no assumptions on the reason). So the fact that A has no information about the child has no effect on the child. So the courts probably wouldn't care about the lack of info. The child's best interests are not affected.
        That is an interesting viewpoint. So, are you saying that it is your opinion if a parent has no role in their child's life (for whatever reason) apart from paying ongoing table child support, then it's tough luck for them if they want to know about things like, for example, how the child is doing in the school, what are their hobbies, how they are doing healthwise, etc? In the eyes of the court as well?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Exquizique View Post
          That is an interesting viewpoint. So, are you saying that it is your opinion if a parent has no role in their child's life (for whatever reason) apart from paying ongoing table child support, then it's tough luck for them if they want to know about things like, for example, how the child is doing in the school, what are their hobbies, how they are doing healthwise, etc? In the eyes of the court as well?
          I think the OP is saying that if there is no contact whatsoever, then the fact that the non-custodial parent isn't kept informed has no direct effect on the child.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by representingself View Post
            I think the OP is saying that if there is no contact whatsoever, then the fact that the non-custodial parent isn't kept informed has no direct effect on the child.
            Ah, I see. Assuming that is true, if the non-custodial parent requests for information about the child, then the custodial parent is able to say something to the effect of: "You're not involved in the child's life in any way, therefore I don't want and don't need to tell you anything about the child.", and a court would uphold this reasoning as valid and reasonable?

            Comment


            • #21
              I think a parent who pays child support, but does not have custody nor any contact whatsoever with the child (for whatever reason), should still have, at the LEAST, the right to know if the child is still alive.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Rioe View Post
                I think a parent who pays child support, but does not have custody nor any contact whatsoever with the child (for whatever reason), should still have, at the LEAST, the right to know if the child is still alive.
                AGREED 110%.

                Which brings me back to my original question: If the parent who is receiving child support has made it a point to NOT provide ANY information about the child whatsoever (including whether the child is alive and well or not), what are the viable options/recourses available to the payor parent?

                There must be others in such a situation/in the situation of the payor parent? What do they do?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Exquizique View Post
                  I've been searching Canlii for cases where one parent was required (as in stated in a court order) to provide ongoing disclosure about child's health, education etc., didn't, and was successfully hammered with contempt of court -- haven't had any luck so far. Theoratically speaking, contempt for something like this is an option, but in reality, is it a VIABLE recourse??
                  Why limit your search with such a narrow criteria. If Disclosure is ordered, the impact of being found in contempt a section should be similar.

                  This one seems to be what you need. I would note that had the financial situation of the mother been different the penalty most likely would have been more severe.
                  CanLII - 2007 CanLII 30750 (ON SC)

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    The ??? act indicates that a parent with ACCESS rights also has the right to obtain health/education information about the child.

                    This is logical - if the kid spends time in your care, you need the info.

                    Now, if making no attempt to exercise access, or unable to, or if access is not permitted, then the right to this info is questionable.

                    I'm not agreeing with the witholding behaviour, just saying why I think that trying to enforce thru the courts won't work.
                    Last edited by dinkyface; 06-15-2012, 12:37 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by SingingDad View Post
                      Why limit your search with such a narrow criteria. If Disclosure is ordered, the impact of being found in contempt a section should be similar.

                      This one seems to be what you need. I would note that had the financial situation of the mother been different the penalty most likely would have been more severe.
                      CanLII - 2007 CanLII 30750 (ON SC)
                      SingingDad, thank you so much!! That is a great case reference!! Although, sad to note that it took 5 years for any kind of consequence to be handed out to the mother ...

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by dinkyface View Post
                        The ??? act indicates that a parent with ACCESS rights also has the right to obtain health/education information about the child.

                        This is logical - if the kid spends time in your care, you need the info.

                        Now, if making no attempt to exercise access, or unable to, or if access is not permitted, then th eright to this info is questionable.
                        So it is questionable for someone paying support for a child to not even know, at the very least:

                        a) whether the child is alive and doing well (healthwise)
                        b) whether the child is actually attending school
                        c) whether the child has any health or medical needs

                        ?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Exquizique View Post
                          So it is questionable for someone paying support for a child to not even know, at the very least:

                          a) whether the child is alive and doing well (healthwise)
                          b) whether the child is actually attending school
                          c) whether the child has any health or medical needs

                          ?
                          I would hope not. Without the above at minimum, how would the paying parent even know if they still have a CS obligation, or if the child's other parent is just taking them for a fraudulent ride?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            If you have a kid, and it is not a case of rape or proven abuse, and are supporting the child, then I personally agree you should be able to get information about the child.
                            But courts suck at enforcement, especially when there is no argument relating to child's best intererests.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              The only reason I can think of that ANY parent should not be provided or entitled to know whether their child is alive, and whether they are healthy and recieving regular health care and schooling is because they have been stripped of or signed away their parental rights.

                              If they haven't paid CS...still the other parent should be obligated to provide such info. If that parent never sees the child, still the residential parent has to provide that info.

                              IMHO witholding info about someone's child, and their health and social progress is JUST AS BAD as witholding CS. EVERY parent deserves the peace of mind to know that their child is ok and safe. And I fully expect that a parent who is trying hard to find out how their child is doing is NOT the kind of parent who is not paying CS.

                              If a parent can be punished for not supporting their child financially, I think an equal punishment should be doled out to a parent who deliberately witholds vital information. 2 wrongs don't make a right!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Thank you everyone for weighing in, you have given me some food for thought in terms of how such a situation like this may be approached.

                                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