Posting on behalf of, due to some technical issues with posting....
Originally posted by Serene
Discussion
Termination of the relationship
CanLII - 2013 ONSC 2445 (CanLII)
This case was brought up in another thread recently. While it relates to a father that was being asked to pay for university costs, I will ask that we leave out the financial aspect completely and make an assumption that nothing traumatic took place between father and daughter (nothing did in this case) when answering the questions below when considering the issues that the judge raises highlighted in bold above:
Note: I've numbered these for ease of reference
1. •Take sufficient steps to attempt to re-establish any type of communication or relationship
2. •Kept door open by letting things calm down AND THEN making efforts towards reconciliation
3. The applicant (mother) should have been helpful in re-establishing the relationship between father and daughter
4. •The mother should have made efforts to pacify the situation between father and daughter
So my question is: What do those numbered items above translate to?
For instance, is #1: Continue to email, text, call the child and extend invitations to spend time with the non-access parent.
Are any of the numbered items above counseling with the non-access parent and the child?
And then I want to know if the other parent is encouraging this behaviour from the child (aka alienation) then how do you accomplish any of the above if the non-access parent can't even communicate with the child (i.e. no one answers phone, texts go unanswered and no confirmation if they were even received, etc.).
Obviously there comes a time when the children's views on access come into play. But this judge makes clear that while the child's views are considered regarding access, that the goal should always be for the child and non-access parent to reconnect AND that is the non-access parent's moral and judicial duty to make concerted effort to pursue the relationship.
My next question is: For anyone that has been through this, perhaps even with OCL involved, did anyone make any formal recommendations on what the non-access parent should do with the child? (i.e. I recommend counseling between father and daughter, or I recommend that the mother give liberal access to the father per the child's wishes, or I recommend the father attend all figure skating lessons the daughter takes, etc.).
Again, I'd really like to not discuss situations of abuse or whatever.
Because that really changes the way forward for the non-access parent and child.
Thanks!
Termination of the relationship
CanLII - 2013 ONSC 2445 (CanLII)
[13]In my view there was a mutual termination of the relationship. However, the respondent (father) should have taken greater steps to rebuild the relationship between him and his daughter. Many parents face similar situations with their teenagers and to simply say "that's it, it's over" is not acceptable. We know that children mature as they age and the attitudes that they exhibit in their teenage years are often no longer present in their twenties. To the respondent's credit however he did continue to make payments until she completed grade twelve at eighteen years of age.
[14]Considering these principles, I also conclude that the respondent has not met the onus in convincing me that Victoria unilaterally terminated the relationship. As mentioned previously, it was a mutual termination, and in my view, he did not take sufficient steps to attempt to re-establish any type of communication or relationship. Regardless of how frustrating this situation might have been, I conclude that following the November 2009 disagreement, the respondent should have kept the door open by letting things calm down and then making efforts towards reconciliation. In fact, he readily admitted that he did nothing.
[15]I also conclude that the applicant has not been as helpful as she could have been in re-establishing the relationship between father and daughter since there is no evidence of what steps she took to pacify the situation.
[14]Considering these principles, I also conclude that the respondent has not met the onus in convincing me that Victoria unilaterally terminated the relationship. As mentioned previously, it was a mutual termination, and in my view, he did not take sufficient steps to attempt to re-establish any type of communication or relationship. Regardless of how frustrating this situation might have been, I conclude that following the November 2009 disagreement, the respondent should have kept the door open by letting things calm down and then making efforts towards reconciliation. In fact, he readily admitted that he did nothing.
[15]I also conclude that the applicant has not been as helpful as she could have been in re-establishing the relationship between father and daughter since there is no evidence of what steps she took to pacify the situation.
Note: I've numbered these for ease of reference
1. •Take sufficient steps to attempt to re-establish any type of communication or relationship
2. •Kept door open by letting things calm down AND THEN making efforts towards reconciliation
3. The applicant (mother) should have been helpful in re-establishing the relationship between father and daughter
4. •The mother should have made efforts to pacify the situation between father and daughter
So my question is: What do those numbered items above translate to?
For instance, is #1: Continue to email, text, call the child and extend invitations to spend time with the non-access parent.
Are any of the numbered items above counseling with the non-access parent and the child?
And then I want to know if the other parent is encouraging this behaviour from the child (aka alienation) then how do you accomplish any of the above if the non-access parent can't even communicate with the child (i.e. no one answers phone, texts go unanswered and no confirmation if they were even received, etc.).
Obviously there comes a time when the children's views on access come into play. But this judge makes clear that while the child's views are considered regarding access, that the goal should always be for the child and non-access parent to reconnect AND that is the non-access parent's moral and judicial duty to make concerted effort to pursue the relationship.
My next question is: For anyone that has been through this, perhaps even with OCL involved, did anyone make any formal recommendations on what the non-access parent should do with the child? (i.e. I recommend counseling between father and daughter, or I recommend that the mother give liberal access to the father per the child's wishes, or I recommend the father attend all figure skating lessons the daughter takes, etc.).
Again, I'd really like to not discuss situations of abuse or whatever.
Because that really changes the way forward for the non-access parent and child.
Thanks!
Comment