Alienation Cases Reviewed

Canada’s Judges On Alienation

The Honourable Justice Brownstone of Toronto on Parental Alienation

99px-Justice_Harvey_Brownstone_on_set

“In my view, the term ‘parental alienation’ incorrectly identifies the target parent as the victim.

“The true victims are the children, who are innocent in parental break-ups. Every child has a right to enjoy a loving relationship with both parents. Since it is the child’s right that is being violated by a parent’s alienating behaviour, it is the child who is being alienated from the other parent.”


The first parental alienation case in Canada happened in 2008. I have no legal training so this list of quotes from Canadian judges may not be landmark cases, but they certainly show Judges are at least thinking about parental alienation. I have tried to pick one quote for each of the six years since the first case.

Most target parents feel exhausted and beaten. But in these cases parenting time with the alienating parent was limited at least during the reunification period, and sometimes it was almost unbelievable how quickly an alienated child was able to begin to relate positively to the rejected parent.


The Honourable Madame Justice Loo of Vancouver in 2014 wrote,

The over-arching recommendation is that all efforts are made to reunite [K.] and [N.] with their father. Given the length of time the alienation has been occurring and the level of severity, the writer’s opinion is that very strong measures will need to be put in place in order to give the children the best chance possible to have their father in their life once more.

There is a considerable amount of literature about alienation and treatment options. Treatment options can range from least to most intrusive, each of which has its pros and cons. Each family situation has to be assessed when considering what option might be most effective. ~ in J.C.W. v. J.K.R.W., 2014 Supreme Court of British Columbia at paragraph 36


The Honourable Judge Gomery of Montreal stated,

134px-Judge-Gomery

“Hatred is not an emotion that comes naturally to a child. It has to be taught.

A parent who would teach a child to hate the other parent represents a grave and persistent danger to the mental and emotional health of that child.”




L’Honorable juge Linda Despôts de Salaberry-de-Valleyfield dit

La Directrice demande au Tribunal de déclarer compromis la sécurité et le développement de l’enfant X, née le […] 2004, en raison de son exposition à de mauvais traitements psychologiques, notamment par l’aliénation parentale que la mère utilise à l’encontre du père.

Pour mettre fin à la situation de compromission, la Directrice recommande que l’enfant soit confiée à son père, qu’elle ait des contacts réguliers avec sa mère, qu’aide, conseil et assistance soient apportés à la famille pour une année et que l’enfant puisse bénéficier d’une thérapie. ~ Protection de la jeunesse (A. contre B.), 2009 Cour du Québec au paragraphe 2


The Honourable Justice Mesbur of Toronto in the S.G.B. case wrote,

115px-Judge-Ruth-Mesbur

Dr. Fidler also addressed the issue of the effectiveness of counselling in cases of irrational alienation. She said, “We know from our failures, so many failures, it is just almost unbelievable to see how quickly an alienated child before your eyes can, once they’re out of the orbit of the favoured parent, can begin to relate positively to the rejected parent and to give and receive love.” ~ S.G.B. v. S.J.L., 2010 Ontario Superior Court at paragraph 43.


DEFINITION OF SPOUSE

When our divorce was decreed in 2001 the definition of a spouse was “Any man or woman married to each other.” Then in 2004 the Honourable Justice Mesbur was asked to divorce two women married to each other. Her Honourable Ladyship realized she could not divorce this couple because of the definition of the word spouse in our Divorce Act, so she declared the definition of spouse to be “unconstitutional, inoperative, and of no force and effect.” Today the definition of spouse is “Either of two persons who are married to each other.”

Less than 24 hours after the couple’s divorce petition was publicized, the Canadian Justice Department was forced to point out that excluding gays and lesbians from the definition of “spouse” in the Divorce Act would prohibit them from divorcing. Earlier, it had told the judge to delay the case until after the Supreme Court had ruled on the constitutionality of same-sex “marriage”, but Ruth Mesbur ignored that advice.

The Globe and Mail hailed same-sex divorce as “a sign of progress” (editorial, Sep. 17, 04), and Ann Perry of the Toronto Star’s editorial board called the ruling “courageous” and “correct” and thought that once again the court was “dragging” “Canada out of “the dark ages (Star, Sept. 18, 04).

The Honourable John Morden Call to the Bar Address, February 2001,

153px-Judge-John-Morden

“…Civility is not just a nice, desirable adornment, to accompany the way lawyers conduct themselves, but, is a duty which is integral to the way lawyers are to do their work.

In the field of litigation, civility is the glue that holds the adversary system together, that keeps it from imploding.”




The Honourable Mr. Justice M.D. Acton of Saskatoon in 2008 wrote

Parental alienation occurs when one parent convinces the children that the other parent is not trustworthy, loveable or caring – in short, not a good parent. As indicated in the Children’s Voices Report ordered by Mr. Justice Maher December 14, 2006 and filed with the Court on April 16, 2007, such manipulation of the children, with the resulting alienation, carries very high risks. The Children’s Voices Report states: “It can seriously distort a child’s developing personality and subsequent life adjustment. The sooner it is identified and appropriate interventions are implemented, the better the child’s chances of avoiding its worst long-term effects.” ~ B.S.P. v. D.G.P., 2008 Queen’s Bench For Saskatchewan at paragraph 12.


The Honourable Mr. Justice Conlan of Owen Sound Notable Quotes

117px-Judge-Conlan

“This is yet another instance where a party has determined that she will decide whether she will obey a (Parenting Time) Court Order or not. L.C. must be held accountable for that…

Those who deliberately and repeatedly flout Court Orders regarding custody and access (now called parenting time in British Columbia) shall be held to account for their contempt. And by “account”, I am not referring to a shake of the finger and a gentle reminder that an Order is an Order is an Order…

L.C. admitted in her testimony that the telephone access did not occur as ordered. Her excuse that she left it up to the very young child to determine whether she wanted to contact her father is no excuse at all – it is absurd.” ~ R.G. v. L.G., 2013 in Ontario Superior Court at paragraph 58


The Honourable Justice Roy of Montreal in 2011 wrote

However, the Tribunal’s view, if we can not speak formally of parental alienation, remains that the father nevertheless exhibits many behaviors that are similar (to parental alienation) and several disturbing reactions described in this evidence are observed in the Child X.

Thus Child X seeks to denigrate his mother to Madame Evans, and complains of an unjustified fear of his mother, asking not to see her.

In addition, he uses expressions which are not usually found in the vocabulary of a child of his age, such as “contract” (in reference to court orders), and “gather the evidence.”

It must also be recognized that gathering evidence against an alienating parent is hard to do. It is practiced privately, insidiously and in the absence of witnesses. The parent who is the victim is usually reduced to indirect evidence, based on the words and behavior of a young child… His bad influence on his child should be limited and custody (parenting time) arrangements must be made carefully. Family Law Decision/Droit de la famille #111527, 2011 in Quebec Superior Court at paragraph 99


The Honourable Mr. Justice Peacock of Montreal in 2012 wrote

[56] All children in Quebec have a quasi-constitutional right to the protection and security of both of their parents. This paragraph refers to the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, article 39: Every child has a right to the protection, security and attention that his parents or the persons acting in their stead are capable of providing.

[57] The uncontradicted evidence of Ms. Pérusse is that if the Court does not do something, there is a high probability that the Father may effectively lose contact with both of his children. This common result of parental alienation is also underscored by Dr. Gardner.

[58] It is not in X and Y’s best interest that this happen. All members of this family need to work together to restore the balance and mutual respect that permitted the equal shared custody to work previously.

[59] The Father has made certain parenting errors in the past. He has been made aware of these errors through previous court appearances. Both he and Ms. L. have paid a price i.e. not being together during certain times of custody. The Father is a sensitive individual who wants the best for his children: he has recognized these errors and needs to be given the opportunity to learn and move forward with his new knowledge of parenting.

[60] The Mother needs to recognize that she is part of the problem and must be part of the solution. She is capable of taking on important responsibility at work: at home, she needs to take on the responsibility that the children will benefit from the Father’s attention now and in the future. She must take ownership of her own responsibility to preserve and promote relationships between the daughters and both parents: not be a constant detractor.

[69] Dr. Gardner warns courts not to be naïve as to how much influence they can have in parental alienation cases. Family Law Decision/Droit de la famille #122229, 2012 in Quebec Superior Court at paragraph 69

Learning About Digital Art

I found that I could add Korean text to documents if I use the Malgun Gothic font. I created the Korean text in Google Translate and pasted it onto our Bubbles of Love poster. Just a rough draft, but fun!

Bubble2_Flyer_B_Korean_La_fete

Bubbles Good Kevin2
















La fête des bulles d’amour – le 25 avril, 2014
Ensemble, nous sommes capables de beaucoup.
Il n’y a que 15 jours avant la journée de sensibilisation!

Bubbles Of Love Day – April 25, 2014
Together We Can Make A Difference
Only 15 days till Awareness Day!

Advertisements

Collaborative Divorce

Collaborative Abbotsford Divorce

Collaborative Divorce Helps Children

I saw an amazing parenting order at the Abbotsford Provincial Courthouse this week. Every Tuesday is remand day, when they bring in all the separated parents, usually just a half dozen or a dozen dads to be attacked by the Court – to be quickly and cheaply processed. Mom’s don’t need to show up for child support enforcement. Even if a parent sues the Director of British Columbia’s Family Maintenance Enforcement Agency or the Canadian government, as in a Charter Challenge, and these big players lose their case, they can never be charged costs in provincial court. Usually, parents who try to sue Canada are told they are in the wrong court. Last summer, the Honourable Mr. Justice Pearlman said he has some sympathy for parents getting shunted between the provincial and supreme courts and never getting a hearing.

But this Tuesday a mom and dad came to provincial court together. They stood up together and mom spoke first. “Your Honour, we have just come from the Family Justice Centre where we created our separation agreement. We don’t have anything in writing but we were told to come here anyway and ask you to create a court order.”

His Honour said that was fine, what would they like in their order?

Mom continued, “Your Honour, we have similar incomes and there will not be any exchange of child support.”

His Honour said, “OK.”

Then Dad spoke, “Your Honour, we have been sharing parenting time a week and a week, and we would like an order to continue and for flexibility in the schedule as agreed between us.”

His Honour hesitated on this second suggestion and asked, “Have you been able to do this without arguing and without calling the police?” but ordered it so after both Mom and Dad answered yes.

His Honour smiled and stated, “I guess we’re done.”

Mom spoke and said, “Yes, Your Honour, those are the orders, but one of our children needs orthodontic care and we are sharing the cost. Could we have an order for that as well?”

His Honour was happy to create the order, and explained that the registry staff would type the order up for them, although the court had such a backlog they would not be able to pick the order up that day. He also explained that they could obtain a divorce order from the Supreme Court. Then the Judge thanked them for being so reasonable and they left.

The judge never saw their financial statements or their parenting plan as neither were in dispute. As more reasonable divorces become the norm in our courts, the high conflict cases will stand out even more as tragic abuse.

This is how I imagine the Abbotsford Court Registry will type up these basic orders:

THIS COURT ORDERS:

1. That the Court is satisfied that John Doe and Jane Smith are guardians of the Children, Joseph Smith, born April 13, 1995 and Jillian Smith, born June 24, 1997.

2. John Doe and Jane Smith shall have the parenting responsibilities outlined in Section 41 of the Family Law Act.

3. John Doe and Jane Smith shall each parent equally on alternating weeks. Any changes to this basic schedule will be as agreed upon by the parties.

4. The parties shall each share equally the cost of orthodontic care for the Child, Joseph Smith.

A Clerk of the Court for Judge J.J. Begbie
A Judge of the Provincial Court of British Columbia




Canada’s Equal Shared Parenting Bill C-560

Canadian Bar Association quoted in Parliament As Against Equal Parenting Time

justice-minister-peter-mackay2

It makes sense that private member’s Bill C-560 is not as powerful as one of the Prime Minister’s 3 omnibus bills that have been forced through the political process. But I was surprised to learn that our Minister of Justice, Peter MacKay, is against our equal shared parenting bill. For me, this was like hearing that cowardly former Prime Minister Jean Chrétien was against equal parenting in 2003, 30 days before he left office. No one dares to be against equal parenting until they don’t have to face an election. If Peter MacKay intends to run in the 2015 election, I will remind you all then that he was on the wrong side of history already, encouraging chaos and conflict in divorce just a year before. If our Justice Minister objects to equality, the only alternative appears to be ongoing chaos. This would seem to be a bad thing for a Minister of Justice – or any politician. Maybe we can argue that children of divorce are victims of crime – robbed of loving parents. Less than 60 hours per week or 36% parenting time is the worst possible outcome for children with willing, fit parents. While Peter MacKay will not stand with Canadians and fight for our children and families, he has promised his Victims Rights Bill will pass within the next few days.

The Canadian Bar Association’s opposition to equal shared parenting means less. The British Columbia Teachers’ Federation and most other labour unions are against equal shared parenting as well, but there are many individual teachers, lawyers, principals and judges, including Canada’s Chief judge who are not only in support of family law reform, but who have personally been through the devastation of our present divorce system. Lawyers more than any other group have made the most profit from divorce conflict. It’s clear the Attorney General of Canada is more concerned about money than about the safety of our children. The next parliamentary debate of Canada’s Equal Shared Parenting Bill C-560 is May 5th.

Bubble6_Flyer_B_french_La_fete

Bubbles Good Kevin2

















La fête des bulles d’amour – le 25 avril, 2014
Ensemble, nous sommes capables de beaucoup.
Il n’y a que 23 jours avant la journée de sensibilisation!

Bubbles Of Love Day – April 25, 2014
Together We Can Make A Difference
Only 23 days till Awareness Day!

Could It Happen in Your Family?

Lawdiva's Blog

DSC00507 (2) Tomorrow at 5 pm I’ll be doing an interview with Jill Egizii who is the host of her own show on blogtalkradio.com out of Springfield Illinois. Jill is a local politician and advocate for children with a special interest in parental alienation.

She’ll be discussing a story out of California involving pop radio icon Casey Kasem, now 81-years-old, who ruled the airwaves for decades as a music historian and deejay, best known for the popular show “American Top 40” and its multiple spin-offs.

Mr. Kasem retired from radio and his impressive voice-over career in 2009 once he became debilitated by Parkinson’s disease. Recently, however, he has been back in the media spotlight as a result of a situation that is sadly, not uncommon.

Mr. Kasem’s three adult children, Mike, Julie and Kerrie, from his 7-year marriage to his first wife, Linda Meyers, have been refused contact with their father by…

View original post 233 more words

Categories: Uncategorized

Parents’ Shared Learning Conference

January 23, 2014 Leave a comment

Abbotsford Parent Shared Learning Evening

School District #34’s 4th Annual Parent Conference Thursday February 20, 2014 at Abbotsford Arts Centre

Abbotsford Shared Learning Conference


Langley EdCamp35

School District #35’s First Ever Free Professional Development Unconference Saturday, April 12, 2014 at RE Mountain Secondary School

Edcamp35 Langley


Abbotsford 2014 – 2015 Earlier Spring Break Calendar

Earlier March Vacation Calendar Called “Status Quo” on District Website

2014 - 2015 Earlier Spring Break


Abbotsford 2014 – 2015 Later Spring Break Calendar

Follow District Website Under News Hub Menu For Updates

2014 - 2015 Later Spring Break

Parents are invited to participate in an online survey, available via the district website at http://www.sd34.bc.ca/board/consultations


Laws Belong In The Public Domain

More often than we might imagine, the laws that govern us are not available for the public, journalists, or researchers to access for free.

The Canadian Charter

Laws that are not in the public domain are directly opposed to any good faith effort to establish political accountability. That’s why I believe we must post all of Abbotsford’s 46 school Parent Advisory Council (PAC) Constitutions online to prevent tampering. Abbotsford parents could re-type any PAC Constitution simply to double the term of their own political office. We need to guard our constitutions.

Any Abbotsford PAC Constitution that calls for appointments rather than elections, or a minimum of 1 in-person meeting per year would also appear to violate multiple layers of laws, including our own Abbotsford District Parent Advisory Council (DPAC) Constitution and Code of Ethics, the School Act, and the Charter. Naturally, this accountability comment applies in spades to all British Columbia’s family laws.


La fête des bulles d’amour – le 25 avril, 2014
Ensemble, nous sommes capables de beaucoup.
Il n’y a que 91 jours avant la journée de sensibilisation!

Bubbles Of Love Day – April 25, 2014
Together We Can Make A Difference
Only 91 days till Awareness Day!

Delay Spring Break A Week?

January 20, 2014 Leave a comment

Abbotsford Spring Break

Want To Change Spring

Break Again?

Abbotsford Trustees Give Parents 5 Days To Respond

On January 14, at the first school board meeting of 2014, the trustees asked if parents wanted to change Spring Break to the end of March instead of the usual earlier March vacation. It wasn’t immediately clear why we would move Spring Break back a week, but read on.

On January 20, the trustees put out an email saying if parents want to present their opinions to the board, they need to register with the Superintendent’s secretary, Lois, within the next 5 days. Usually, matters like this would be discussed at the District Parent Advisory Council (DPAC) first, but Abbotsford hasn’t had an effective or voting DPAC for the last three years, since the last election. When Abbotsford parents created our 2-week Spring Break in 2011, 75 parents and one teacher addressed the DPAC, asking to increase our holiday. It was an easy sell, like asking voters if they want to lower taxes. Maybe we are about to start changing our Spring Break every election year.

Re: Official Notification – Local School Calendar

At the Regular (public) Meeting of January 14, 2014, the Board served the following Notice of Intent:

That the Board of Education serve Notice of Intent that the 2014/2015 Local School Calendar be presented for debate and vote at a regular meeting of the Board to be held on February 25, 2014.

In support of Bill 36 (The School Amendment Act), the Ministry of Education has recently issued a revised calendar regulation, Section 81.01(7).

Parents are invited to participate in an online survey, available via the district website at http://www.sd34.bc.ca/board/consultations

Your two options:

1. Earlier Spring Break

  • Two-week Spring Vacation March 16 – 27, 2015
  • School begins the day after labour day (Sept 2, 2014)

    1. 2. Later Spring Break

      • Two-week Spring Vacation March 23 to April 6, 2015
      • School begins the day after labour day (Sept 2, 2014)

Parents are invited to attend the Regular (Public) Board Meeting where stakeholder input will be received by the Board regarding the proposed Local School Calendar for the 2014/2015 school year on:

Tuesday, February 4th at 7:00 p.m. in the Boardroom at the School District Administration Office

Both options meet the prescribed minimum hours of instruction that a board must offer to students enrolled in the schools in its school district. Each calendar includes a two-week winter vacation, two-week spring vacation, 6 non-instructional days, and Thursday, June 25, 2015 as the last school day for students (Friday, June 26th for teachers). In addition, Thursday November 27, 2014 has been designated for Parent-Teacher Conferences (this day is not counted in the instructional hours).

When you go to the online parent survey, it provides the following explanation. The first option is to schedule Spring Break from March 16 to 27. Selecting this option would allow us to overlap at least one week with every school district in the Fraser Valley and Metro Vancouver.

The second option, has a later Spring Break (March 23 to April 6), which would be combined with Easter.

Balancing Our Minds 2014

Tools For Youth Wellness Tue.Feb.11.14 Rogers Arena, Vancouver, BC

Here’s a link and the poster for the upcoming Youth Forum taking place at Rogers Arena in February. Please send to anyone you think may be interested in attending this exciting event!

BC Mental Health

Prime Minister Harper Speaks To Israel

Sharing Our Values About the Rule Of Law

It’s interesting to focus on Israel and Canada discussing increasing parenting time for male parents after hearing Prime Minister Harper vowing loyalty in his January 20th speech to Knesset.

Shared Parenting

La fête des bulles d’amour – le 25 avril, 2014
Ensemble, nous sommes capables de beaucoup.
Il n’y a que 94 jours avant la journée de sensibilisation!

Bubbles Of Love Day – April 25, 2014
Together We Can Make A Difference
Only 94 days till Awareness Day!

2013 Summary Review

January 17, 2014 2 comments

Formative vs Summative Assessments in Education

Assessing Student Learning with Portfolios at Rick Hansen Secondary

When teachers prepare a report card at the end of the year, they call it a summative assessment. When teachers ask their students informal ongoing questions to monitor if they understand the course material, they call it formative assessment.

Rick Hansen Secondary students blog about their weekly reflections in the Aviation Academy and their teachers call these portfolios a new assessment method. When the WordPress.com stats helpers prepared a 2013 annual report for this blog, I guess I could have called it a year-end summative assessment, but maybe like the students, the Make Abbotsford Aware website is also my parenting portfolio?

Here’s an excerpt:

A San Francisco cable car holds 60 people. This blog was viewed about 990 times in 2013. If it were a cable car, it would take about 17 trips to carry that many people.

Click here to see the complete report.


The Changing Definition of Parent

How To Amend A British Columbia Parent Advisory Council Constitution

The School Act changed on March 18, 2013 which is the day the Family Law Act came into force, trying to discourage high conflict divorces by removing incendiary words like custody and access from our vocabulary and encouraging reasonably co-operation. The new words are parenting time and parental responsibilities and we need to add these new concepts to every PAC Constitution in our province to comply with our amended School Act and for the sake of our children.

How To Amend A BC PAC Constitution

Teachers Infiltrate Parent Groups

Teachers On Parent Advisory Council Executives In Conflict of Interest

Teachers asking to be PAC Presidents and then voting to shut down the Parent Advisory Councils are a big problem in British Columbia. Teachers are so desperate to try to silence parents and control the discussion about education they will even obstruct the School Act to do so by discouraging parents from being involved in school planning.

Teachers Cannot Vote On PACs

La fête des bulles d’amour – le 25 avril, 2014
Ensemble, nous sommes capables de beaucoup.
Il n’y a que 97 jours avant la journée de sensibilisation!

Bubbles Of Love Day – April 25, 2014
Together We Can Make A Difference
Only 97 days till Awareness Day!

The Definition Of Parent

January 15, 2014 2 comments

A Day At The Courthouse

The Definition of Parentage Under the Family Law Act

I had an amazing day today at the Abbotsford Provincial Courthouse, learning about British Columbia’s new Family Law Act. Judges are starting to use the new language of parenting responsibilities and parenting time. When you go to court in British Columbia ask the Honourable Judge to order that you and your parenting partner shall have the parenting responsibilities outlined in Section 41 of the Family Law Act. The next paragraph is a copy of Section 41 because parenting is the tough and these 14 jobs are a good to-do list.

Parental responsibilities
41 For the purposes of this Part, parental responsibilities with respect to a child are as follows:

(a) making day-to-day decisions affecting the child and having day-to-day care, control and supervision of the child;
(b) making decisions respecting where the child will reside;
(c) making decisions respecting with whom the child will live and associate;
(d) making decisions respecting the child’s education and participation in extracurricular activities, including the nature, extent and location;
(e) making decisions respecting the child’s cultural, linguistic, religious and spiritual upbringing and heritage, including, if the child is an aboriginal child, the child’s aboriginal identity;
(f) subject to section 17 of the Infants Act, giving, refusing or withdrawing consent to medical, dental and other health-related treatments for the child;
(g) applying for a passport, licence, permit, benefit, privilege or other thing for the child;
(h) giving, refusing or withdrawing consent for the child, if consent is required;
(i) receiving and responding to any notice that a parent or guardian is entitled or required by law to receive;
(j) requesting and receiving from third parties health, education or other information respecting the child;
(k) subject to any applicable provincial legislation,
(i) starting, defending, compromising or settling any proceeding relating to the child, and
(ii) identifying, advancing and protecting the child’s legal and financial interests;
(l) exercising any other responsibilities reasonably necessary to nurture the child’s development.

If you live in Abbotsford you will also ask the Honourable Judge to order that Spring Break shall be shared equally between the parties. The first half of the Spring Break to be with you in 2014, and your parenting partner to have the first half of Spring Break in 2015 and to alternate in this manner.

Technically, School Boards can set school calendars to change over a three year period in British Columbia, so call your local school board to figure out your parenting schedule.

The First School Board Meeting 2014

The Definition Of A Parent Under the School Act

This evening I attended the first Abbotsford School Board Regular Meeting for 2014. The Trustees are trying to develop greater clarity around the definition of a parent under the Family Law Act. That definition states thirteen sections that describe how to assess parentage in adoption and assisted reproduction. However, even before the Family Law Act, the definition of a parent was never clear. I always told judges I had never done a DNA test on our children, but I was their parent because I felt it in my heart. Everyone went along with my definition of a parent because they wanted to try to get court costs and child support out of me.

Interestingly, the definition of a parent changed under the British Columbia School Act on March 18, 2013, which is the date the Family Law Act came into force, as follows:

“parent” means, in respect of a student or of a child registered under section 13,

(a) a parent or other person who has guardianship or custody of the student or child, other than a parent or person who, under an agreement or order made under the Family Law Act that allocates parental responsibilities, does not have parental responsibilities in relation to the student’s or child’s education, or
(b) a person who usually has the care and control of the student or child;

I suspect that the School Act wants to get parental consent from which ever adults have parenting responsibilities in relation to the student’s or child’s education. The Family Law Act is how you get an order that the Honourable Court is satisfied that you have parenting responsibilities in relation to your child because you feel these duties in your heart.

One way to get such an order would be to ask your former spouse to consent to this order. The judge would have difficulty denying a consent order.

Another way to get such an order, would be to bring a Charter Challenge asking the Attorney General of Canada why the Divorce Act of Canada violates our Charter of Rights by denying an automatic consent order or a rebuttable presumption of equal parenting. In your Charter Challenge you would simply offer as a remedy that you be granted a one-time Constitutional exemption from the Divorce Act to allow you to parent equally. The Courts would probably let one parent get away, rather than strike down the entire Divorce Act. Or better still, maybe when your children grew up, you could tell them the story of how their parent struck down a terribly hurtful law in Canada. Every time there’s an unequal parenting order, women get hurt, either mom herself or a second wife, a grandmother, a sister, an aunt, or maybe a cousin.

La fête des bulles d’amour – le 25 avril, 2014
Ensemble, nous sommes capables de beaucoup.
Il n’y a que 99 jours avant la journée de sensibilisation!

Bubbles Of Love Day – April 25, 2014
Together We Can Make A Difference
Only 99 days till Awareness Day!

%d bloggers like this: