Neither BC’s Family Law Act nor our Divorce Act have a presumption of equal parenting time and a private member’s bill to amend the Divorce Act to establish a presumption in favour of shared parenting was just defeated in the House of Commons.
The focus of child custody and child parenting time law is the best interests of the children not the best interest of the parents. In many but not all cases shared child parenting time works best for a child and both of that child’s parents.
Lorne MacLean, Q.C. Shared Custody Lawyer
Lorne Maclean, Q.C. has had great success in obtaining shared child custody since the 1980’s by focusing on shared parenting plans that focus on benefiting children and making all family members winners. His successes for children and their parents include wins in Alberta of week on week off a breast-feeding baby, shared custody success for gold medal Olympian Rebagliatti and numerous other successful BC shared child custody cases.
We tell our clients that playing the blame game is a no win situation for either parent and we always ask our clients to focus on child focused solutions.
Recent Case Where BC Shared Custody Recommendation Assessed By Court
In BCB v. RWB 2014 BCSC 622 Master Baker provided a sage decision on why parents need to focus on their child’s best interests not their own:
[8] To attempt to decide who is right or wrong in his or her perspective on this is, as they say, a mug’s game. It seems to me that, while a judge in trial may need to explore this in detail, it does not assist for me, in an interim application such as this, to assess blame or cause; it is neither necessary nor is it helpful. Indeed, it may simply add fuel to an unfortunate fire. It is enough that I am guided by Dr. Aube’s observations and conclusions.
[9] I say that because I frequently point out to parents that complete equality in parenting time or specific precision in apportioning that time seldom serves the children’s best interest. In other words, not all time is equal in value or utility. Every parent knows that some parenting time is drudge work and some is (a word I try to avoid) quality time. Too many parents, in my respectful view, assume that parenting time is analogous to asset division, i.e. that the presumption is 50/50. Children and their time are not assets and the default parenting time is not necessarily strict equality.
[10] Having expressed those generalities, Dr. Aube’s report recommends exactly that, and with good and supported reasons. That being the case and having heard considerable argument on the point, it seems to me that the court needs to assess the parties’ respective offerings and try to assess which most closely incorporates Dr. Aube’s recommendations. It should not surprise us to learn from the parties that, where they disagree each has his or her reasons. I accept that each holds those reasons sincerely and genuinely, but it must be said that in my experience and in the context of family law the human animal has an infinite capacity for rationalizing its reasons and actions. Usually, in situations such as this, those reasons support, in that person’s perspective, the best interests of his or her children.
In the end Master Baker ordered a modest increase in time to the father pending the trial of the case although expert Dr Aube said shared parenting was best for the child and would reinforce the child knowing both parents were critical to a child’s development. Master Baker indicated the issue was better dealt with at trial and it is not uncommon for a court to await cross examination of experts and spouses to come to a decision on what parenting regime is best for a child.
If you seek shared parenting time you and your child deserve to have Lorne MacLean, Q.C. represent you. Call him at 604 602 9000.
