Four Reasons Why BC’s New Family Law Act is Good for Fathers

Jun

Four Reasons Why BC’s New Family Law Act is Good for Fathers

Posted June 25, 2012 by Georgialee Lang in Divorce, Family Law. Tagged: access, contact, custody, denial of access, Family Law Act, Family Relations Act, Parenting Coordinators, parenting time. 5 Comments

British Columbia’s new family laws will be in effect on March 13, 2013. For husbands and fathers who have felt victimized and exploited by the Family Relations Act 1979, there is every reason to be optimistic that the new law will assist them to achieve the fairness and equality they have been fighting for.
The first bit of good news is that effective March 13, 2012 the new law will apply to everyone, even if they commenced a family law proceeding under the current Family Relations Act that has not yet been concluded, with one exception. Property claims made under the old Act will be governed by that legislation, unless both parties agree that the new law should be applied.
The changes in law that will assist fathers include:
1. Pejorative terminology is removed:
The language of “custody” and “access” used in the current legislation left many parents feeling marginalized and overlooked as fully contributing parents who provided value to their children’s lives. These terms also connoted an “I win, you lose” philosophy. The language of the new Family Law Act is “parenting time” and “contact”, words that do not imply ownership of children by one parent to the exclusion of the other.
2. Endless court applications regarding children can be avoided:
For fathers who are constantly struggling to see their children regularly, or have a vacation with their child, or obtain their child’s passport for travel, or the dozens of other irritants that require fathers to go back to court, the new law has introduced and codified the role of a Parenting Coordinator. This person, who may be a counselor or a lawyer, will be empowered under the law to make binding decisions with regards to parenting issues, with the criteria being “the best interests of the child only”.
3. Informal parenting arrangements will be respected:
In scenarios where a father and mother have recently separated and have worked out a voluntary parenting plan, one parent cannot unilaterally change the plan. What often occurs is the parties will agree to a particular schedule, but when mom learns about dad’s new girlfriend, or is angry over some event involving dad, it is not uncommon for mother to unilaterally impede the regularly scheduled parenting time of the father. This new law forbids this kind of unilateral action.
4. Denial of parenting time will be treated seriously:
One of the most common complaints from fathers in high conflict marriage breakdown is the capricious, unreasonable denial of parenting time as punishment for the parties’ separation, even when the separation was requested by the mother.
The new law recognizes the importance of a father’s time with his children and will take serious steps to enforce parenting time. The key is that a father must complain to the court within 12 months of the access denial. In those circumstances the court may order compensatory parenting time to make up for the time denied. The court can also order a denying parent to go to counseling, pay a $5000.00 fine or reimburse the father for all of his expenses including travel expenses, lost wages and child care expenses incurred as a result of the refusal to comply with the informal parenting arrangement or the terms of any agreement or court order.
In my view the government has enacted new law that is meant to assist parents who do not want to be excised from their children’s lives. The important matter now is that the public be educated as to the upcoming changes so they can improve their relationships with their children.
A final note: there are many mothers who do not conduct themselves in ways described above, but when they do the emotional and financial damage to the family is devastating and destructive, both for the parents and the children.
Lawdiva aka Georgialee Lang

Ontario divore law takes bold new step... about time

..

Ontario to force couples seeking divorce to attend mediation session

.

.

By Chase Kell

Associate Editor

.Posts
Website
Email
.By Chase Kell | Daily Brew – Thu, 21 Jul, 2011.. .
.



tweet10
Email
Print
....
.


A two-year court battle, exacerbated by $15,000 in legal fees, brought Scott McLarty's 25-year marriage to a bitter end.

A decade later, McLarty finds himself in a familiar spot, up against his former wife as he attempts to restructure the terms of their settlement.

This time, however, McLarty and his ex-wife have been ordered to attend a two-hour mediation session - part of a provincial program aimed at finding an agreement to avoid bitter litigation.

After a couple formally files for divorce, each will be given a sheet pertaining to the mandatory session prior to court appearances. Attendance is confirmed with a stamp, a requirement that permits the divorce proceedings to move forward should the couple fail to reach an agreement.

"I think it would have been a catalyst for us to take a step back, take a deep breath, and see if there were things we could sort out on our own," said McLarty of his divorce, which was ultimately settled out of court, in a National Post story.

"When you're going through a divorce, you're angry, you're depressed, you're in an 'I want to win' mentality. The information session encourages you to try to work together and come to a solution."

Avoiding nasty court battles and saving thousands in legal fees are contributing factors, but reducing backlogs in court and limiting the effect on children played a substantial role in implementing the initiative.

An estimated 160,000 people make use of Ontario's family courts each year, creating scheduling conflicts and lengthy wait times.

"Some cases involve a long court fight," said Attorney-General Chris Bentley in the story. "This (mediation session) will give people a better sense of whether it's worthwhile having one."

When looking back at his divorce, hindsight suggests McLarty's two-year procedure was "probably not" worth it. And, in his opinion, the bulk of those he joined at his April session may come to the same realization.

"My impression, looking around at the room of 40 or so people, was that maybe 50 per cent of them could figure things out outside the courtroom," said McLarty in the story. "I'm hoping that this time we'll try to settle (the terms of our agreement) in mediation, but we'll see if (my ex-wife) agrees."

With the mandatory session, Ontario has joined an international effort to promote mediation and avoid lengthy, costly and often bitter litigation. The U.K. recently joined states such as Utah and Florida by enforcing these mandatory sessions.

Toronto-based divorce mediator, Deborah Mecklinger, practiced in Florida when mandatory mediation was implemented. After sharing her experience with couples wishing they had attempted mediation prior to court, Mecklinger explains not everyone is prepared for the amicable approach.

"Mediation requires two people who are interested in a win-win solution," she explained in the story. "That's not true of all divorcing couples."

(CP Photo)

Finaly a female lawyer with some good logic

Canada Fathers

I really like this writer and its great to she is female, a lawyer and seems to understand our plight with the injustices in the Canadian Family leagl system

here is her blog; http://lawdiva.wordpress.com/
and her web page: http://www.georgialeelang.com/

...

Thank you Canada.com

I found this aricle on Sunday April 11th 2011 front page when I went to their website, can you imagine my surprise and happiness to see the media actually looking at such a story? here is what I saw;

" With lawyer’s fees in the tens of thousands of dollars, many Canadians wander alone into family court like sheep to the slaughter. "

here is the link; http://www.canada.com/news/decision-canada/real-agenda/story.html?id=4585240


and here is the story copied and pasted "just in case it dissaperas"

http://www.canada.com/news/decision-canada/images/banner_real_agenda.jpg



Georgialee Lang: "Legal aid for family law in Canada is almost non-existent, while refugees and criminal thugs, even terrorists, feast from the public purse."
Canada’s system of family law is decimating us, one family at a time. With nearly 40 per cent of Canadian marriages ending in divorce, our next government needs to stop the bleeding, financial and emotional.

Our adversarial court system pits husband against wife in a dangerous game that all too often spirals out of control, taking whole families down and destroying children’s lives in the process.

Custody cases are among the worst. Separating parents, usually fathers, are caught in a black vortex, fighting for the ability to remain an active part of their children’s lives, sparring with mothers who too frequently use their hurt and anger to alienate their partners from their children.

To date, our governments have refused to make the changes that most jurisdictions in North America have already adopted: a move to a presumption of joint custody, in which parents continue to participate in their children’s lives on a level playing field. With a rebuttable presumption of joint custody as the law of the land, a significant group of potential family law litigants could bypass the court system.

Regrettably, our system does neither parent any favours. With lawyer’s fees in the tens of thousands of dollars, many Canadians wander alone into family court like sheep to the slaughter.

Legal aid for family law in Canada is almost non-existent, while refugees and criminal thugs, even terrorists, feast from the public purse.

What Canadians face is a shortage of judges and court staff, who gamely try to administer an underfunded bureaucracy that cannot meet their needs, and a process where the battle lines are drawn before they get there — the beginning of their long wait for justice.

Legislators, law reformers, judges and lawyers have long recognized that court is no place to resolve family law disputes. Ontario’s Law Commission released a report last September entitled “Voices From a Broken Family Law Justice System” decrying longer trials and increasing court and legal fees that are crippling a system that cannot deal with the intense emotional fallout of personal disputes.

In a recent family law case, Bruni v. Bruni 2010 ONSC 6568, Mr. Justice Joseph Quinn of Ontario began his Reasons for Judgment with a feigned cry for help—“Paging Dr. Freud, Paging Dr. Freud”—a provocative introduction to a bizarre family law case that was ill-suited for court intervention. Justice Quinn referred to the “roulette of family law.”

The case took seven days of court time over a period of several months; not unusual since judges are routinely overbooked. Much of the evidence had nothing to do with the two legal issues: a claim to set aside a separation agreement and an allegation that Ms. Bruni had alienated the children from their father. The level of vitriol stunned Justice Quinn, who refused to set aside the agreement and admonished the parties for their childish, bordering on criminal, behaviour. Justice Quinn took the brave step of denying Ms. Bruni spousal support as a rebuke for the wedge she had driven between the children and their father.

My solution? Take family law out of court and move it to Family Centres with a one-stop shopping approach. Provide education, counsellors, child-development professionals, mediators, arbitrators, divorce coaches, parenting coordinators and financial experts. These services should not be free, but should be paid for by those who access the programs on a sliding scale commensurate with their family income. For the poor and working poor, legal aid should be provided.

For those cases that will never settle without judicial intervention, appoint highly experienced judges who want to be there, as opposed to judges who find family law work a grind they would rather avoid.

Is there a political party that will heed the cries of millions of Canadians?

Georgialee Lang is a Vancouver lawyer and arbitrator named in “Best Lawyers in Canada.” She blogs at lawdiva.wordpress.com. Her website is georgialeelang.com.

© Copyright (c) Postmedia News



E-mail this Article
Print this Article
Share this Article





STORY TOOLS

E-mail this Article
Print this Article
Comments (13)
Share this Article

Font:






RegisterLogin or
What Do You Think?

Want to rate posts and get your own personalized user name? Please register an account today!Questions? - Visit our FAQ

Post My Reply
14 comments
Sort:
Report Abuse

Score: 0
anonymous
11:56 AM on April 10, 2011
Thrusting divorce on children is the most common form of child abuse. Its the right of every child to have their parents around and taking care of them for their entire childhood. Have any divorced 'losers' asked their children how they felt? It should be illegal to divorce if there are children under 18. If you are unhappy or just want to start test driving again, wait until the children grow up. That is the sacrifice expected of every parent.
Report Abuse

Score: 0
anonymous
11:32 AM on April 10, 2011
Wow! Another well thought-out, thoroughly researched and timely article by Ms. Lang. When will the politicians get it? As soon as we the electorate get energized ton make it Ana election issue. Ms. Lang is doing her part, do yours.
Report Abuse

Score: 0
anonymous
11:16 AM on April 10, 2011
Family Centers make a lot of sense to ease the process of divorce - especially when custody of children is involved. But what about prevention? Could these Family Centers offer pre-marriage services? Is it possible to prevent the destruction of Canadian families by giving couples the tools they need to solve their issues? While I agree with the approach of taking this process out of court unless absolutely necessary, the generalizations provided by Me. Lang are tiresome and border on offensive. I agree that fathers are often the ones fighting for more time with their children. Mothers tend to be primary caregivers. But to paint mothers as embittered harridans who want nothing more than to punish their ex and their children is an over-used and inaccurate generalization that has no place in this process. Every woman I know who has faced a custody battle in her divorce has acted honourably with her children's best interests at heart.
Report Abuse

Score: 0
anonymous
10:51 AM on April 10, 2011
this is a great idea, just make sure to charge the users for the expense....

start paying to take care of your own children, and I am certainly not paying for your failed relationship.

Score: 0
Name withheld
10:40 AM on April 10, 2011
This comment is under review.

Score: 0
Name withheld
10:40 AM on April 10, 2011
This comment is under review.
Report Abuse

Score: 0
anonymous
10:32 AM on April 10, 2011
The lawyers (vultures) do not wish to change anything as it is very profitable to remove the assets of clients.

Questionable liens, writs, caveats, judgments and other tools these lawyers use are given to courthouse taxation officers for the purpose of removing the real estate assets of clients who have been bilked by their lawyers.

The divorce act is just another piece of laughable federal legislation being circumvented by lawyers and courts in every province in Canada.

Lawyers should not be able to participate in any real estate transactions and this should be left for other professionals far removed from the national lawyer gangs.

Lawyers govern themselves using Law Societies (self governance) and this is more of a protection racket than anything else.

Law Societies provide no value to Canadians and their self governing power needs to be removed from them.

There are many more courthouse liars than you think.
Report Abuse

Score: 0
anonymous
10:25 AM on April 10, 2011
Harper can fix this. He can fix anything. Just ask. http://www.Canada-Elections.blogspot.com
Report Abuse

Score: 1
anonymous
9:26 AM on April 10, 2011
Unique among the authors in this series, this woman actually makes sense.
Report Abuse

Score: 1
anonymous
8:57 AM on April 10, 2011
Growing up Iwas kept from my father & & the stories were perpetuated to justify his absense to me. I was 27 before I saw him again. He mwas not perfect but he was my father. I carried resentment to my mothers death. I did not want this for either.

at 27 my waife decided to take advantage of the new divorce laws introducded in the mid 80's. she was stepping outside the marriage and wanted out. I came home to an empty two todlers that were everything to me gone. I was prepared to do anything not to put my children through what I had gone through.

3 years 10's of thousands bankruptcy and 5 lawyers later I found out thatthe system was not fair and I lost contact with my children for ten years.

My children are now grown with their own children. I do not speak poison, but I beg both my daughter and son and spouses not to repat my history again..
Report Abuse

Score: 1
anonymous
8:47 AM on April 10, 2011
The court system right now is very biased against men. I know of a man who is non custodial but tries to be very active in his children's lives. He pays an exorbidant amount of child maintenance every month. Yet another man I know has custody for a very good reason and has had to fight tooth and nail to get any child maintenance and when it did get ordered it was next to nothing. His ex has used the system to the hilt and gets away with it yet hurts the child because the child seens to have no rights in this matter! I was always told the good of the child is always uppermost in the minds of lawyers and judges. I have not seen it yet! What has been shown to be important is the money which would look so much better in the child's education account instead of some lawyer's bank account!
Report Abuse

Score: 0
anonymous
8:43 AM on April 10, 2011
You had my attention up until the part that said "let's create a monolithic tax-funded program to assist people in getting a divorce"
Report Abuse

Score: 1
anonymous
8:40 AM on April 10, 2011
What we need to do is to start letting the children have a voice. They know what they need and they also know when and who is using them in this terrible game. I am tired of seeing children hurt because of one vengeful parent!
Report Abuse

Score: 1
anonymous
8:33 AM on April 10, 2011
Long overdue.

thanks again canada.com

Two really informative books

I heard two interviews from these authors on satalite radio and web cast and I think they need special mentioning, I also really hope it is a new way the legal profession is looking at the issues of divorce and hopefully will follow up with some new laws and guidlines because things are way outta hand as they are in both Canada and the US.

This first book is from a sitting Judge in the US her name is Judge Michele Lowrance and it is called "The Good Karma Divorce". I have not had the oppertunity to read it through yet but I will, and maybe report on it, but it discusses what would seem to be a common sense way of dealing with divorce if all else fails, it is a positive unaggressive way to negotiate seperation on good terms leaving an amicable relationship in tact instead of adversarial. From what I have read and understood so far I think this book should be the first guideline or step in any divorce
http://thegoodkarmadivorce.com/

The second is a book by Wendy Jaffe, Esq. and while I have only seen an interview of her and her book "Divorce Lawyers' Guide to Staying Married" what I saw was impressive and I hope will become something for the legal system to serioulsy read and consider and get away from making the process so adversarial and diffucult when the situatio is difficult enough.
http://www.divorcelawyersguide.com/

There seems to be some big names giving good reviews of these books and authors and I hope to obtain a copy of both of these books so I can thoroughly read and share with friends in similar situations and get their opinions and share them as well. The divorce system in Canada and the US is broken and needs to be changed now, and like I mentioned before I hope these two are pioneers in what is a new phase of Family Law