Withholding Access

[Soiled]

So a question was posed to me today, and I'd like to get opinions on the options in the situation.

Father lives in Alberta, mother in Ontario, child lives with the mother, and is 12yrs old I believe.

In the near future the father will have the opportunity to visit his child and intends to spend the week bicycle riding with him. Unfortunately the fathers dad was killed a long whole back while riding a bicycle. The mother is stating that due to this, his family obviously doesn't know proper bike safety, and she has decided she will withhold access.

Past experience with the mother makes him suspect she will hold to this, and likely call the cops on him if he attempts to pickup his child. As per his court order he is entitled to several weeks in the summer with the child, with all the normal sufficient notice rules, which he has given.

Based on what I've seen and read, I recommended that he show up to pick up the child as per the notice he has given (he has to go to Ontario for another reason anyhow), and if he is refused, he should go to a courthouse and see about an emergency motion. He should be using the time between now and then to figure out what he needs for that.

Warned of course to not be aggressive or overly confrontational due to the possibility of police involvement, and to have a recording device of some sort to record their interaction in the event she tries to lie about them to the police.

Any alternative or better options out there? The emergency motion would likely eat up several days, if not the duration of his trip unfortunately, if it's needed, due to having to wait for it to occur.

[standing on the sidelines]

she has to realize that accidents happen. Has no one in her family died in an accident or preventable diseases? A bike accident by the fathers father doesn't reflect on the dad in this case. In fact I would think that if anything it would make him more cautious.

I am not sure if this would be something for an emergency motion though.

[LovingFather32]

If any access is withheld he needs to act.
First send an email stating that he will be bringing a motion unless access is reinstated. Provide a brief deadline for the reply e-mail. Emergency motions are tricky but workable, and any judge that heard the parents reason wouldn't take it lightly I don't think. At my emergency motion I couldn't prove D5 was in any immediate danger .. but the judge still cringed at the situation and gave ex a deadline for access and set an earlier Case conference.
Accidents happen every day .. what a ridiculous reason to withhold access to a child, who was probably looking forward to the fun bike rides.

[standing on the sidelines]

yes he has to act, I am just not sure that an emergency motion is the way to go right now.

[Soiled]

Unfortunately threats to withhold access seem to be a pattern with her. I'm unsure if he has gone out and called her on it for one in the past however.

The normal, time consuming court process seems inadequate in cases such as this, where the 'access' parent is travelling clear across the country for a visit. Should an emergency motion be unallowed in a situation like this, it would be pretty damned easy to burn up a years worth of access, if not multiple years, by doing something like this.

For example, he goes, she refuses. He then files for a nice toothless motion of contempt. It would have to be filed in Ontario, therefore, he either has to be fly out to self rep for it, spending thousands, plus using holiday time, or missing work. Or, he has a lawyer rep him by proxy, and he again spends thousands. Time for all this to occur would likely be months.

And then, in her shoes, if I was her, I would then go to the court, and say it was all just a misunderstanding, and of course had I not misunderstood something I would have been more than happy to allow the visit. Judge says don't let it happen again, and off she goes, mission accomplished, fathers not around the child for the summer. She could then do something like that again the next year, and perhaps then consequences may occur. But likely at the cost of yet another missed summer for the father and child. It's hard enough for fathers in the same city to get access to their kid when dealing with an unreasonable and controlling mother, I can only imagine it would be far longer, and far costlier for it to be done from across the country.

Sure there's no danger to the child to warrant an emergency motion on those grounds, but the loss of a relationship, and financial devastation it would entail to enforce their current court order would be averted by an emergency motion at the time of the denial.

Just all seems so ridiculous to have such hoops to jump through due to a mother playing gatekeeper

[standing on the sidelines]

who moved?

[Soiled]

They moved back and forth from o radio to Alberta I believe, court order is from an Ontario court. Pretty sure new actions have to be filed in Ontario, due to that. It's something he looked into previously

[standing on the sidelines]

They moved back and forth from o radio to Alberta I believe, court order is from an Ontario court. Pretty sure new actions have to be filed in Ontario, due to that. It's something he looked into previously

yes I think you are right.

[Links17]

The father should tell the mother tht they won't go bicycling and then just go bicycling. It has nothing to do with her and she is an idiot.

[Soiled]

Ha-ha couldn't agree more Links.

He asked her to put it in writing that she wouldn't allow him to take his kid on a bike trip, and suddenly it's all just a big misunderstanding. The topic of the potential for legal action was raised and she apparently backed down completely. So hopefully when he shows up for the visit, there are no further issues.

Thanks for the replies.