The "Process"

[MrToronto]

A Parents "rights" is the fundamentals for the CLRA, it's the starting point. Without parents there is no Act.

Example

Under this Act both parents are equally entitled to custody of the child and under s. 20(4) that right may be suspended if the parents are separated and the child resides with one of the parents with the consent (express or implied) or acquiescence of the other. The right to access is not restricted and the custodial arrangements may be varied through an agreement or court order.
Access is found under s. 20(5) of the Act and similarly to the Divorce Act it includes the right to visit the child, ask questions and receive information relevant to the child’s well-bring and upbringing


This is the point LF32 is at ...he's a separated Parent with no RIGHTS as a parent

Once you establish who a Parent is....then Best Interests of a Child is determined.

What's best for a child is maximum contact with the Parents

There are other rights....like don't abduct my child

Don't remove the child from the jurisdiction without a parents consent...minor items like that

 

[LovingFather32]

Not abduction? I was at work. She unilaterally removed our child without my consent and hid her. Just because she made up some false allegations (that weren't worthy of CAS or the police even) doesn't change the title. Its abduction. Don't downplay it. No..I don't know where she is.

I am not sure the high road is thousands of messages on a forum.

No .. the high road is being able to recognize the important role the mother will always play regardless of the outcome of all of this. We will be at weddings, graduations, writing in communication books, sending e-mails to each other after this mess. Im looking in to the future. I want no conflict. As soon as her LAO's wings tire she may b able to think for herself and our child and we can ponder resolutions.
Will you ever give me a break with making fun of my threads? Geez. It's a chat forum. Im chatting, discussing and doing what chat forums are made for.

Better to talk to a professional about your emotional state than self diagnose I say....

But I do. My EAP. I'm also educated in the area and know the signs and symptoms to look for. I'm doing fine. Not as fine as I could be obviously given the circumstances. Definitely nothing of concern. Even a professional says so (EAP).

I am not concerned with your ex actually. I am concerned with YOU and YOUR behaviour. You need to be mindful of your personal behaviour. Make more friends than enemies and you will do fine in your family law matter.....

ME and MY behavior huh? My ex jolts D3 from supervisor, turns hers and D3's back to my mom and supervisor. She coaches D3 to say things to OCL that I never said. She lies about drug use (which I proved wrong with a hair follicle), she's deprived D3 a relationship with her father by restricting access. She wont communicate in a log book. I cant even know what D3 ate before she came....shall I go on? And you're concerned with MY behavior. Honestly Tayken. I have nothing to say to that. lol
I'd be worried if I wasn't a little anxious. Now THAT would be abnormal.

Family law isn't about "rights". It is about resolution to a problem with a set of Rules to help guide two parties to a solution. How you exersize those rules is up to you.

Under this Act both parents are equally entitled to custody of the child and under s. 20(4) that right may be suspended if the parents are separated and the child resides with one of the parents with the consent (express or implied) or acquiescence of the other. The right to access is not restricted and the custodial arrangements may be varied through an agreement or court order.
Access is found under s. 20(5) of the Act and similarly to the Divorce Act it includes the right to visit the child, ask questions and receive information relevant to the child’s well-bring and upbringing.

And if Im the only one seeking resolution? That's where we're at. I try to communicate, cooperate, negotiate. They intimidate, VILLIFY, and fight. But it's my behavior your concerned about. Intriguing.

Parents are often driven by "fear" which is an "anxiety". When you see psychologists talk about fear is an element of anxiety. Worry is too. ".

Fear and anxiety are interrelated. Fear causes anxiety and anxiety causes fear. Anxiety deals more with apprehension or worry about the future whereas fear stimulates the amygdala, eliciting an emotional response to a "known" threat. Thus, I would presume parents are driven more by "anxiety"(unknown/worry) than "fear" (known threat). I wrote a thesis on how the two states operate in Panic Disorder. Very interesting. Parents worry about the future, upcoming court cases, etc. They "don't know" what the outcome will be.
Good news is it's normal. A moderate amount of anxiety is actually needed to push you, say for a test. Too much anxiety is obviously bad.
That's why you must monitor and do a bit of CBT on your internal scripts to distract from the worry.

And Tayken .. until you have your child (I wont say abducted) unilaterally removed while you were at work and hidden for months, you may not fully understand. Im sure you can even agree to that. I do have access/custody rights as a father. Resolution has been my focus since day 1. Im just waiting for the other party to jump aboard. Again, you preach reaching solutions. My ex wants continuous war and its my behavior you question.

Either way Tayken. You don't have to worry about me. 100% of the ppl on this forum are talking about their issues just like me. If you want to worry about somebody worry about my dear little 3 year old who is being held from her daddy.

 

[Straittohell]

Sadly, we're all a little right, and we're all a little wrong.

The system is SUPPOSED to be about the rights of the child and their best interests, but the reality is a mess of competing interests, egos, and personal vendettas. It highlights the need for a law that makes 50-50 the default, enforceable by police immediately upon breakdown of the relationship, (unless both parties consent otherwise) with the onus being on the applicants wishing a change to prove that it is not in the child's best interest.

One can certainly be right on a technicality that this is not abduction because it doesn't meet the letter of the law, but in practice, LF32's case is much closer to abduction than it is a simple case of "one party behaving badly". Just because the label doesn't match, doesn't mean that he isn't feeling the EFFECTS of his child being ripped from his life in a manner that is similar to abduction. Think about it, he gets her 3 hours a week, supervised, if he is lucky, and never knows if the access will happen. There are violent offenders in prison who get to see their children more often than LF32.

It is perfectly valid to say that LF32 shouldn't be caught up in an endless cycle of "what if" thoughts, but at the same time, it is perfectly valid for him to be prepared. Take, for example, the very wise advice that MrToronto gave him a while back about hiding under the bed (figuratively speaking, of course). Sure enough, there was one day when LF32's ex parked outside his house in the middle of his visitation, hoping to provoke an incident. Naturally, LF32 didn't bite, because he is too smart for that, and he has been given excellent advice.

Here's the thing, folks, LF32 has been given a mountain of advice for the simple reason that he has asked for it. True to his promise that he made in the beginning, he has not allowed it to consume him or drive him off a bridge. He has listened to everyone's different opinions and facts, and made, I think most of us will agree, all of the right calls for the last six months. He has legal counsel, he has avoided conflict, and he has had excellent quality time with his daughter on the occasions that he has been "allowed" to see her.

It is for that reason that I find some of the feedback from today to be driven by good intentions but a bit out of touch with LF32s reality. Some things that I hope that everyone will consider:

1) Three threads and thousands of messages, and I don't see anything up that identifies him, his ex, his daughter, or libels his ex. Nothing on this thread will either help or hurt his case if it ends up in a giant pile of printouts on a judge's desk. It will be binned.

2) LF32 has come a long way. He knows more. He is battle hardened. He is tougher. He has kept his head up. Try to give the man a little respect. He hasn't imploded yet, but many have. Perhaps he IS doing all of the right things to take care of himself. He is not obligated to justify that part of his life to anyone here. One user continues to suggest he see a "clinician", thus assuming that LF32 hasn't had the wherewithal to have already done so, or even truly needs it. This might be hard to believe, but not everyone that is subjected to stress requires constant therapy.

3) LF32 is indeed attempting to protect the rights of his child. Just because he references his own rights doesn't mean that he is doing all of this out of ego. The bottom line is that our society is immensely screwed up when it comes to defining fatherhood. There are those who rightly bash dad that don't pay child support and don't see their kids. Sadly, those people are also the ones that urge dads to avoid conflict, stay out of court, accept whatever access the mom thinks is right, and just sign the child support cheques. I am blown away by some of the folks on this forum who continue to ignore the fundamental fact that LF32 has little other option than to pursue this matter in court. There is no reaching out to the mother. She has lawyered up and built up the OCL and CAS wall. She's so textbook it's scary. LF32s rights in this matter are not to be slandered and treated as a second class parent. They are not mutually exclusive to the rights and best interests of his child, they are, quite frankly, interconnected.

4) Since he is ignoring me, Tayken won't be able to answer this, but I dearly wish he/she would stick his/her neck out and identify what, in his opinion, the resolution should be. Anyone notice that part? He/she won't accept that what the mother is doing is monstrous and harmful to the child, he/she simply says "it is a difficult situation". Most unfortunate.

Keep at er', LF32. I think you're on the right track.

 

[mcdreamy]

The system is SUPPOSED to be about the rights of the child and their best interests, but the reality is a mess of competing interests, egos, and personal vendettas. It highlights the need for a law that makes 50-50 the default, enforceable by police immediately upon breakdown of the relationship, (unless both parties consent otherwise) with the onus being on the applicants wishing a change to prove that it is not in the child's best interest.

Did I miss something, is the OCL report back? Last time I checked in, there was a claim of abuse. Until that claim has been settled, I don't think it is in the child's interest to have unsupervised access, let alone 50-50.

In fact, this case highlights our existing system striving to work to the childs advantage, and remains subject to review and reports. Mind you, the system could work a little quicker.

 

[OntarioDaddyMan]

[\Quote] 4) Since he is ignoring me, Tayken won't be able to answer this, but I dearly wish he/she would stick his/her neck out and identify what, in his opinion, the resolution should be. Anyone notice that part? He/she won't accept that what the mother is doing is monstrous and harmful to the child, he/she simply says "it is a difficult situation". Most unfortunate.

Keep at er', LF32. I think you're on the right track.[/QUOTE]


Sometimes it is easier to hide behind a vague statement. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But in the end that is all it is and all it's worth.

But again, this is the internet and this is a public forum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MrToronto]

Bite your tongue LF32..the posy showed up today....they want to provoke

 

[LovingFather32]

Did I miss something, is the OCL report back? Last time I checked in, there was a claim of abuse. Until that claim has been settled, I don't think it is in the child's interest to have unsupervised access, let alone 50-50.

In fact, this case highlights our existing system striving to work to the childs advantage, and remains subject to review and reports. Mind you, the system could work a little quicker.

Lovely ....

 

[MrToronto]

yeah I pm'd you on that....sweet wasn't it

 

[stripes]

Bite your tongue LF32..the posy showed up today....they want to provoke

^^ This is an example of what is meant by "negative advocacy". There is no posse (there's no posy either, a posy is a garland of flowers ...), no one is trying to provoke LF. There are many different people with different ideas here, some of whom have had a whole lot more experience with the courts and family than others.

In general, if someone is telling you that everyone else is out to get you or encouraging you to see the world as black and white, us vs them, good vs evil, absolute right vs absolute wrong, that person is not doing you a favour. Not everyone who disagrees with you is bent on doing harm to you.

 

[standing on the sidelines]

^^ This is an example of what is meant by "negative advocacy". There is no posse (there's no posy either, a posy is a garland of flowers ...), no one is trying to provoke LF. There are many different people with different ideas here, some of whom have had a whole lot more experience with the courts and family than others.

In general, if someone is telling you that everyone else is out to get you or encouraging you to see the world as black and white, us vs them, good vs evil, absolute right vs absolute wrong, that person is not doing you a favour. Not everyone who disagrees with you is bent on doing harm to you.

you hit the nail right on the head. Great post

 

[MrToronto]

good post by Straittohell.

I gather from Ontariodaddyman's post...which is how you started this matter LF32... is all about "resolution"

It makes sense because that's exactly what we advised you to do....mediation...settlement offers...disclosure....going through conferences

Resolution is for common sense people.

But what was glaringly missed....is your not dealing with a common sense situation.

Maybe it was missed intentionally...maybe not.

LF32 your stripped down to the basic laws, and your working from there...if resolution comes that will be nice....if it doesn't then FAMILY LAW and your basic rights come into play.

There is family law...but it's for the 4 percent that go to Trial anybody who thinks..there is no FAMILY LAW has never been to Trial.

 

[Once.is.enough]

As the word turns.........

This and previous threads are nothing but drama self feeding drama......

 

[MrToronto]

people with DOT"S in there nicks...are lucky they can't be ignored

 

[MrToronto]

All the Girl Guides are descending tonight...sweet...feels good to be in a club

 

[LovingFather32]

No drama here. Just healthy chat. I welcome all thoughts. From Stripes, to Sidelines to McDreamy .. you name it. The more info I get, the more knowledgeable I become.

 

[standing on the sidelines]

No drama here. Just healthy chat. I welcome all thoughts. From Stripes, to Sidelines to McDreamy .. you name it. The more info I get, the more knowledgeable I become.

It is best to hear things from all points of view. That way you can see where your arguments are flawed or where you strengths are. There may be things that you don't think of yourself.

Too bad Mrt doesn't want you to hear other points of views. When others post he takes to the name calling etc. Why is he so scared for you to hear other points of view? Maybe its time for you to tell him that you like to hear other points of views and to stop with the name calling etc, that it isn't productive?

 

[LovingFather32]

Mr T. has been an incredible wealth of information.

I think that when you mcDreamy, tayken, stripes all come on at once telling me what's wrong with me, the thread, etc that he sticks up for me.

I read the other thread about horses going on .. you're all there now. Kind of move around as a group. Think thats all hes trying to convey. Im going through hell. I don't need cheeleaders or sugar coats. ... at the same time I don't think all posts should be against my threads and I.

 

[standing on the sidelines]

Mr T. has been an incredible wealth of information.

I think that when you mcDreamy, tayken, stripes all come on at once telling me what's wrong with me, the thread, etc that he sticks up for me.

I read the other thread about horses going on .. you're all there now. Kind of move around as a group. Think thats all hes trying to convey.

I am not a follower. There is no group mentality. I use the new post feature and post on threads that interest me. No conspiracy there. So you are saying that now if people post on the same thread they are part of a group? That we have secret little meetings to post in the same thread???


Where on this thread have I said that there is something wrong with you??

 

[OntarioDaddyMan]

It is best to hear things from all points of view. That way you can see where your arguments are flawed or where you strengths are. There may be things that you don't think of yourself.

Too bad Mrt doesn't want you to hear other points of views. When others post he takes to the name calling etc. Why is he so scared for you to hear other points of view? Maybe its time for you to tell him that you like to hear other points of views and to stop with the name calling etc, that it isn't productive?

It could be that others opinion may come across as derogatory and demining. Even though they make a point ( to which can seem insulting) they can stop at that. but instead they pull every single word from a post and analyze it.

 

[LovingFather32]

I am not a follower. There is no group mentality. I use the new post feature and post on threads that interest me. No conspiracy there. So you are saying that now if people post on the same thread they are part of a group? That we have secret little meetings to post in the same thread???


Where on this thread have I said that there is something wrong with you??

I have no issue with you. I don't think you have secret meetings..just that you enjoy each others company .. nothing wrong with that. Do you agree with mcdreamy? That I still should have supervised access? After no police, (ever), 3 months not seeing D3, 4 months successful supervised visits, etc? Drug tests, alcohol tests, work with children daily...

Do you agree with McDreamy?