Discussion of Perceptions of divorce and our children.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Unless "wife#2" is a part to the litigation and identified as an in loco parent.
In Loco Parentis originated in the 19th century to identify the rights of caregivers, often teachers and administrators in boarding schools, to control and discipline children in their care.

Currently the term is applied to describe situations where a step-parent may be financially responsible for a child after separation, but it is not limited to that.

The term may also be applied to situaions where a child is being cared for by a babysitter or a grandparent. A possible issue would be if a babysitter had to discipline a child in their care, or if a grandparent was letting a child stay up late and receiving complaints from a parent. There is a question of rights to decision making on the spot, and also civil liabilities after the fact.

In this case the term seems relevant. A step parent is caring for the child and will in some cases be making decisions such as when to go to bed, have supper, do homework, etc. In a high confict situation I can certainly imagine that a divorced parent would complain about how "their child" is being raised by a step parent. We often hear tales of this sort of conflict on the board here.

In Loco Parentis and the rights of a caregiver don't just depend on an after-the-fact analysis of a relationship during a divorce proceeding to determin if a step-parent has some financial obligation to continue supporting a child, although this the most prominent example in media and in recent court actions. It is also a principle that supports a step parent in their rights and responsibilities to a child currently in their care.
 
In Loco Parentis originated in the 19th century to identify the rights of caregivers, often teachers and administrators in boarding schools, to control and discipline children in their care.

Currently the term is applied to describe situations where a step-parent may be financially responsible for a child after separation, but it is not limited to that.

The term may also be applied to situaions where a child is being cared for by a babysitter or a grandparent. A possible issue would be if a babysitter had to discipline a child in their care, or if a grandparent was letting a child stay up late and receiving complaints from a parent. There is a question of rights to decision making on the spot, and also civil liabilities after the fact.

In this case the term seems relevant. A step parent is caring for the child and will in some cases be making decisions such as when to go to bed, have supper, do homework, etc. In a high confict situation I can certainly imagine that a divorced parent would complain about how "their child" is being raised by a step parent. We often hear tales of this sort of conflict on the board here.

In Loco Parentis and the rights of a caregiver don't just depend on an after-the-fact analysis of a relationship during a divorce proceeding to determin if a step-parent has some financial obligation to continue supporting a child, although this the most prominent example in media and in recent court actions. It is also a principle that supports a step parent in their rights and responsibilities to a child currently in their care.

Where in jurisprudence has this been executed and supported by the court in any family law matter? :)

I can talk to the medical obligations a practitioner of medicine under the Medical Act has to take direction from a parent. This does not include a step parent's opinion and only that of the legal parents in conducting medical procedures.

Custody is rather well defined and it isn't about "bedtime". If one wants to establish themselves as a "parent" outside the bounds of a "natural" parents in law they have to be a party to the case.

A test of the theory would be for any "step parent" to go in and request that their "step child" be prescribed medication for say a learning disability. It would be malpractice under the law for the practitioner of medicine to take instruction from the "step parent" and prescribe without consent from the custodial parents.

In absence of the parents being present to emergency service of medicine it falls on the professionals in practice to make the appropriate decision. The step parent is relegated to providing information but, cannot make a custodial decision for which the "natural" parents can only provide under law.

In a situation of extreme emergency it would be the medical practitioner who, relying upon their medical training, and not the instruction from a "step parent" to do what is right for the child in question. They won't put their professional practice on the line for a step parent's decision.

Good Luck!
Tayken
 
Last edited:
It is certainly supported in 19th century cases that originated the concept. I doubt that there have been many recent issues brought to trial; that does not diminish the nature of the concept.

There are some more recent web pages written by lawyers explaining these concepts, I read them about 5 years ago when my ex and I began dealing with issues like new girlfriends possibly caring for the kids. There are all kinds of petty conflicts that arise.
 
The Wikipedia article sums up pretty much what I wrote.

In Loco Parentis

I think it would be pretty hard to argue against the idea that a step-parent would have a financial responsibility after separation, but no rights to actually raise the child during the relationship. The two concepts are interdependant.

Here is recent example of application of the concept. The notable point here is that the "step-parent" was seeking the result in order to continue being a parent after separation; it was not due to support issues.
 
It is certainly supported in 19th century cases that originated the concept. I doubt that there have been many recent issues brought to trial; that does not diminsh the nature of the concept.

There are some more recent web pages written by lawyers explaining these concepts, I read them about 5 years ago when my ex and I began dealing with issues like new girlfriends possibly caring for the kids. There are all kinds of petty conflicts that arise.

Too many and that is why the court has two parties to the case generally. The natural parents. Now, there are even more complex situations in more modern families with mixed sexual orientation. The jurisprudence is incredibly mixed on these matters and really needs more to be done. The jurisprudence is horribly unbalanced in these matters and on the balance, the natural parent gets a custodial say when brought before the court.

The court is faced with a significant burden when a step parent gets involved as a witness. Now, bias is clearly observed in weighing the evidence that is for sure but, these "step parents" often do not understand their place in the family dynamic when it comes to what defines "custody" truly before the court.

Many are disappointed to realize that they have no "control" over the matter and that they are there to love the child but, they have no "legal rights" when it comes to decisions that fall under "custody". Well, they have a right to support their partner in the matter but, their voice isn't a doubling down against the other natural parent in the matter.

Two wrongs don't often make a right in family court. Just because your new partner is equally able and willing to hurl allegations doesn't make them "more true".

Good Luck!
Tayken
 
The Wikipedia article sums up pretty much what I wrote.

In Loco Parentis

I think it would be pretty hard to argue against the idea that a step-parent would have a financial responsibility after separation, but no rights to actually raise the child during the relationship. The two concepts are interdependant.

Here is recent example of application of the concept. The notable point here is that the "step-parent" was seeking the result in order to continue being a parent after separation; it was not due to support issues.

The step parent would have to file an Application to the court for custody and access of the children in question though. Just like grandparents have to and we see how well that works out for grandparents quite often before the court.

If the person in question is a "parent" then they should be a party to the case and not just a witness though... :)

Just to point out... There is no mention of in the link provided to the concept of "step parent" at all... Nor the National Post article the article provided relies upon.

Also, the case is very different in the fact that the parent in question:

The judge said she accepted earlier findings of the court, by Justice Kristine Eidsvik, that both during the planning for conception and after the birth of the child S., there was an understanding that R. and H. would have the primary parenting responsibilities over S. and that D. would carry the baby for them in return for the opportunity to have and to raise baby N., also using assisted conception, along with her lesbian partner.

For example... Not sure how "case on point" this example really is to the discussion...

Here is the case law on the specific matter in the articles:

D.W.H. v. D.J.R., 2011 ABQB 608 (CanLII)
Date: 2011-10-12
Docket: FL01 11127
URL: http://canlii.ca/t/fnkmw
Citation: D.W.H. v. D.J.R., 2011 ABQB 608 (CanLII)

... and this is the case law for which the justice in the above case law relied upon:

D.W.H. v. D.J.R., 2009 ABQB 438 (CanLII)
Date: 2009-07-16
Docket: FL01 01406
URL: http://canlii.ca/t/24rm7
Citation: D.W.H. v. D.J.R., 2009 ABQB 438 (CanLII)

Good Luck!
Tayken
 
Last edited:
In the case I linked to it worked out well enough. A person is either acting as a parent or they are not; very often the grandparents, as much as they love their grandchildren, are overvaluing their roles. In the case of a step-parent the issue of day to day care and decisionmaking would be more obvious.

My point is that the role, the rights, and the responsibilities are in effect whether there has been a court challenge or not. A court result recognises existing situations, it does not create them on the spot out of fluff and vapour.
 
In the case I linked to it worked out well enough. A person is either acting as a parent or they are not; very often the grandparents, as much as they love their grandchildren, are overvaluing their roles. In the case of a step-parent the issue of day to day care and decision making would be more obvious.

My point is that the role, the rights, and the responsibilities are in effect whether there has been a court challenge or not. A court result recognizes existing situations, it does not create them on the spot out of fluff and vapour.

Custody doesn't define "day to day care and decision making" though. It deals with specific incidents of medical decisions, schooling, etc... Furthermore, the case you cite worked out well as there was an existing agreement between all parties to define the parentage. (Justice outlines all the existing agreement prior to conceiving the child in question between all involved parties.)

Not sure, but I don't know any step-parent who enters a relationship with someone who already has kids who has established this agreement prior to the children in question's conception... :)

Step-parents are not involved in the conceiving of the child generally. So, there is little that can be drawn from the case law in my opinion that could be leveraged to establish a parent "after the fact" that they are a legal parent to the child in question.

I think we are in agreement? (possibly?) that just because you enter a relationship with a person does not make you a legal parent as a "step-parent" which is a parental role created "on the spot out of fluff and vapour". Furthermore, it is a relationship between only one parent and the step-parent in question. The other parent didn't get a say in this new "parent's" rights to dictate incidents of custody and access.

Assuming a parental role in "day to day" activities (and limited to when the child is residing with you and your partner) and "being a parent" are two very different concepts before the court.

Good Luck!
Tayken

PS: This is not to negate the importance that step-parents (or anyone who loves a child) has in their lives. But, often many can't see the boundary for which they exist as a "step-parent" in legal matters.
 
Last edited:
Ohhhh this is all just yet another reason why I will never be wife #2, 3 or 4 ;) Unless the "kids" are over 21, that is... Maybe.

On a lighter note: is it bad to buy a Nutcracker (as an Xmas gift) shaped like a Reindeer (it's ornamental too) for the ex?

As for above: Tayken is simply pointing out how the poster's observations may be construed, in my opinion.


:) I think your gift idea is wonderful.
 
CanLII - Search all CanLII Databases

Nutcracker and divorce comes up 3 times on CanLII federally.

For some reason, angry people either destroy tickets to the nutcracker and or literally flush them down the toilet.

That is a shame really. It is a good show. The poor nutcracker always gets the brunt of the anger. In the end though, it all works out for him.

Hadenoughs original post did make me laugh. Your citations also put a smile to my face today. Thank you both :)
 
Holy snappers - did you read the Ryan v. Ryan?
There is a new wife/stepmother gone crazy.

I didn't even intend for that but, interesting and relevant to the thread:

The father is also asking that restrictions presently placed on his new wife, which prevent the father from leaving the children in her care alone, be lifted.

The restrictions were lifted but, wow... Just wow. I didn't even notice that one. I was just searching "nutcracker".

Something interesting to note:

The mother submitted that this hearsay evidence was an attempt by the father to get before the Court a psychologist report that was specifically disallowed by the College of Psychologists because the psychologist in question was acting in the dual role as both a therapist and an assessor without the written consent of the mother. The psychologist in question voluntarily withdrew his Affidavit that had been provided by the father because he was strictly prohibited by the College of Psychologists from acting in the dual role. It was argued by the mother that the father’s Supplementary Affidavit dated March 3, 2009 was an “end run” to get this evidence before the Court and that it was improper.

Good Luck!
Tayken
 
;) it was a good read.

Speaking of relevance,my questions that began this thread, and the single question which was asked as a result, have been left unanswered.

Regaedless, the discussion certainly became intresting.

I was hoping for further insight.
 
Lol re: the Nutcracker!! I didn't think anyone had noticed my little comment. The Ballet Performance is one of my favorites, and I'd never destroy tickets to attend :)

I have a feeling my gift might get tossed out as well, but that's okay ;)

As for perceptions of divorce: my child seems to have weathered it all quite well. We have had to develop a very good sense of humor at our house and I think on a positive note: S14 sees that (eventually) wrongs can be made right, that the ability to overcome is present and strong, as well as the fact that mom didn't roll over and take the boots (metaphorically speaking).

I chose the path I did (taking my matter to Court) for the eventual benefit of my son. Had I not done so, we would be much worse off although these last few years have been difficult. I fully expect the new year to bring us closure on a few things, although most days I have the feeling that none of this is ever really 'over.' We just (hopefully) learn to deal with it better. I'm likely repeating myself when I say that.

I'm a tad concerned that the "gift" doubles as a blunt object. Hoping I won't have to ever worry about that. Other than that, it's quite tasteful and I considered keeping it but decided I'd like to "give it" more than I want to keep it, lol.
 
Last edited:
Lol re: the Nutcracker!! I didn't think anyone had noticed my little comment. The Ballet Performance is one of my favorites, and I'd never destroy tickets to attend :)

I have a feeling my gift might get tossed out as well, but that's okay ;)

As for perceptions of divorce: my child seems to have weathered it all quite well. We have had to develop a very good sense of humor at our house and I think on a positive note: S14 sees that (eventually) wrongs can be made right, that the ability to overcome is present and strong, as well as the fact that mom didn't roll over and take the boots (metaphorically speaking).

I chose the path I did (taking my matter to Court) for the eventual benefit of my son. Had I not done so, we would be much worse off although these last few years have been difficult. I fully expect the new year to bring us closure on a few things, although most days I have the feeling that none of this is ever really 'over.' We just (hopefully) learn to deal with it better. I'm likely repeating myself when I say that.

I'm a tad concerned that the "gift" doubles as a blunt object. Hoping I won't have to ever worry about that. Other than that, it's quite tasteful and I considered keeping it but decided I'd like to "give it" more than I want to keep it, lol.

:) I think your sense of humour must help you as well. Thank you hadenough.

Oh and LOL
 
So, you are a qualified child psychologist and can provide statements from a minor child statements of truth that the mother in question is "absolutely horrible"?

I do have medical background, as a matter of fact. However, my opinion of horrible behaviour hardly takes a degree. Anyone can make this claim, it is clearly an opinion and I gave an example, both here and on other posts, of what I am describing. If others do not consider this to be bad behaviour, that is their opinion.

Why have you not acted on this to protect the child in question through the family courts? You seem very assertive and definite on the statements made against the other parent in the matter.

I/we (my husband) have. As I stated before, it seems no one really cares. I read on this site a few weeks ago someone said if the 'behaviour/abuse' is not so bad that if you were dead and the parent was single, would CAS actually take the child away? I thought this was wonderful advice and something to think about. Just because the behaviour is bad, does not mean that I am saying I feel the child (MY STEP-SON) should be taken from his mother. I do think however, that he has been place under tremendous stress by her and his siblings and grandma intensional over the past few years.



But, you claim to have "evidence" to the "absolutely horrible" other parent? Have you contacted the CAS about your concerns? Has the actual parent in the matter to the child in question brought forward your grave concerns about the "absolutely horrible" other parent to the Family Court?

Yes, these issues were all but dismissed. As I have written on other posts, when we tried to discuss these issues with the OCL, they cut us off and said it was hearsay. We asked the OCL investigator if he would like to see some of the emails from the past 2 years, he declined. Then he had the nerve in his report to state 'emails between the parties show no conflict. They are able to communicate.' WTF?!?! We are not aware of what emails he is refering to at all??? And yes, this was all brought before the judge, who took 15 min to rule in favour of the OCL report.



100 messages over two years...

2 years is 730 days. (2 * 356 = 730)

100 messages over 730 days is an average of 0.13698630137 messages a day. The horrors of this "absolutely horrible" other parent. How do you cope with such conflict and harassment?
Where did you learn to do math??
100 messages over 730 days is 1 example every 7.3 days. And yes, I support the fact that we have had some sort of incident at least once a week (on average) for the past 2 years. I said 'examples' not messages. Weather its his oldest kids emails, his ex's emails, something we heard from the child, whatever, it is examples of the 'horrible behaviour' of his mother.



Note the red, bold and underlined word in that quote. The child in question is not yours. Might I suggest that this might be part of *your* problem, reason for being and posting on this site and challenge/conflict you are "experiencing".

I never said he is my child. I will not even entertain such stupidity. Also, please show me an example (as you frequently ask of others) of any judge anywhere who has look 'unfavouralbe' at someone refering to a child as 'my step-son'. I'm waiting.

In fact, at 12 a child's opinion on residential location DOES matter and WILL be heard by a court and given weight.

I am very well aware of this. My point, is that this was not appropriate in anyway to tell a 9 year old (you are the one who always wants to focus on the children). It is true that a court will hear their opinion, but NOT that a child HAS to chose between his parents at the age of 12, which is what MY poor step-son was told. Are you actually suggesting that this is appropriate to tell a 9 year old? He came to us crying because he thought he would either not see us, or not see his mom ever again after the age of 12.



Did you consider that probably half of the other kids the child of your husband (father) and the child's mother are living seperate and apart. That the child in question may have talked to a friend. A friend may have communicated this. The child may have talked to the "horribly awful" other parent about this and that was about it?

Your agrument here is weak....again. I am stating a FACT that I would swear to in court, that MY STEP-SON came to us crying stating, 'Mom keeps asking me which school I want to go to. She says when I'm 12 I have to decide who I want to live with.' Under the circumstances of our situation, which you have not lived through for the past 2+ years, this made perfect sense to us, and we never questioned who said what to him.

I challenge you to bring forward a motion on a "material change in circumstance" and request the involvement of an S.30 evaluator (CLRA Rule) and/or OCL and present your "evidence".

We did. It did not help. We discussed many issues, offered evidence, none of it seemed to matter. Again, with a hundred examples, I really don't know what you want to hear. OCL was aware that his oldest kids, who are adults, were given all emails between them and court documents. They were also interviewed by the OCL investigator, as was I, which I would say makes me pretty involved in the situation. And yes, the OCL investigator wanted my opinion on matters regarding the parents.



1. Your husband, who is the legal parent to the child in question hasn't contacted the CAS about "weekly" and "literal" "abuse"?

What for? Its emotional abuse. Unlike his ex, we are not high conflict. We do not think it is in his best interests to be taken from his mother. We have only ever asked for equal time share. We think if the OCL and the courts did not seem to care, why would the CAS?

2. Again, the child in question is not "your child". The parental responsibility of the child in question lies with the father and mother. Children are not property.

Get a life. He is MY STEP-SON. I don't believe this implies I own him. Stick with the agruments/discussions at hand and you would get more respect.


(a) Go on motion, attach the emails to an affidavit demonstrating involvement of the "oldest kids" in the matter to the court?

Done, they don't care.

(b) Call CAS and provide them with the emails you claim are happening?

See my above statement re. CAS.




Yet, what have you don't to protect the children in question from the "suffering"? Or are you just lamenting?

We took him to councelling (by we, I should say my husband). When the councellor asked him at the very first interview, 'what are your concerns?' MY STEP-SON'S response was 'my brother spends to much money in gas to drive me to school' And yes this was brought to the judges attention as well.
The mother and brother had been complaining to MY nine year-old step-son about how much it cost them to drive him to school after the mother moved 30 min away because she did not get what she wanted in court and MY STEP-SON was ordered to stay in his same school blocks from our home. So they spent the next year filling his head with crap like this to get him so stressed to say he wanted to change schools. Judge did not care. Changed his school and assess schedule on an emergency motion in 15 minutes time.


Well, an email sent to a child by a parent containing court documentation is not "hearsay". So either you don't have the evidence or don't know what "hearsay" is.

The children in question are adult children. You always speak about 'relavant' evidence. I'm not sure how relevant this issue is to MY STEP-SON. It was in affidavit about the lack of communication between oldest kids and mother putting them in middle, emails, etc. Guess it did not matter.

An email, that has a full trace route of the header from sender to receiver that has a carbon copy to a child is not "hearsay". It is cogent and relevant evidence.

Your "alleged conversation" with children is "hearsay". Unless the child confirms the conversation and concerns to the OCL that were expressed to you... It is "hearsay" (also known as "he said - she said" and possibly in your matter "what you said and what the other parent said")

Yes, thank-you. I know what hearsay is. This incidence took place after OCL investigation and the incidence prior to this were not investigated by the OCL. OCL said they would not discuss anything about this type of thing with child because it would place them under so much stress, which I agree, it would. Are you actually suggesting I get we get the child to sign sworen statement everytime he tells us something? Or ask the judge to put him on the stand?



Actually, as posted by another litigant as stated by a respective justice... "Its all about perception".

If conflict is happening as you stated, then the evidence to the conflict and origination of the conflict has a clear paper trail. But, if you perceive the other party to be conflicted without evaluating your own contribution and possibly conflicted actions... You may not notice when you are creating the conflict.

I absolutely am creating the conflict!!!! 100%!!!! My being alive and having had a child by my husband is what has created conflict in the first place!!! Separation was going fine until hubby got together with me!

Suffice to say, calling someone horrible, abusive, and the other words used in your own message don't lead to no conflict. In fact, they lead directly to CONFLICT. Furthermore, they may demonstrate the party who may be causing the conflict in the matter... Just a hypothesis.

Yes, if I/we were making those claims directly to her, it would create more conflict. Saying them on a forum, don't think so.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Where did you learn to do math??

100 messages over 730 days is 1 example every 7.3 days. And yes, I support the fact that we have had some sort of incident at least once a week (on average) for the past 2 years. I said 'examples' not messages. Weather its his oldest kids emails, his ex's emails, something we heard from the child, whatever, it is examples of the 'horrible behaviour' of his mother.

In grade school:

How to Calculate the Mean Value

In other words it is the sum divided by the count.

What I provided was the average (mean) per day.

100 (number of messages) / 730 (total days) = 0.13698630137 messages per day.

Good Luck!
Tayken
 
Yes, if I/we were making those claims directly to her, it would create more conflict. Saying them on a forum, don't think so.

Hear is hoping that the other party in the litigation hasn't retained Feldstein Family Law Group:

Social Media and Family Law

You would be surprised how many threads from this forum make it into continuing records and are placed in the hands of CAS workers from parents who identify the other parent posting on this site on prima facie evidence.
 
Sorry, one last paragraph, got cut off.

This would be one OCL report that would be very interesting to read to say the least "wife#2". Clearly you have been interviewed by the OCL and I do encourage you to read it, understand the observations made by the OCL and share them with everyone in this community.

If you think I would actually put MY STEP-SON, husband, myself, my family on this site for your own curiousody, you are dead wrong. As someone else pointed out, why don't you share a little information about yourself? You ask it of everyone else, but are you to good to provide your own court documents 'with everyone in this community'.

Sorry for all the spelling errors! No time to go through and fix now!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top