Our Dawson Creek child custody parenting time lawyers know that it is imperative for the Courts and top Dawson Creek family lawyers to consider the best interests of the child in decisions relating to parenting time, parental responsibilities, guardianship, and contact with the child. Considering the best interests of the child is critical because it helps to look after a child’s psychological and physical well-being. Hiring one of our skilled and no nonsense Dawson Creek child custody parenting time lawyers can increase your chances of a successful child focused resolution. In today’s blog Fraser MacLean explains Dawson Creek Parenting.
Dawson Creek Child Custody Parenting Time Lawyers 250-262-5052
Our highly rated Dawson Creek child custody parenting time lawyers handle child custody, guardianship, parenting time and contact and access cases. Our Dawson Creek child custody parenting time lawyers also handle child mobility and relocation cases involving a parent wanting to move away from the Dawson Creek and Fort St John area.
If you make an agreement about parenting arrangements after a Dawson Creek divorce or separation, the Family Law Act says you must only consider the child’s best interest.
Our Dawson Creek Child Custody Parenting Time Lawyers office is located in downtown Fort St John at 9503 th Avenue. Jeff Courson heads our Dawson Creek family law and Dawson Creek Child Custody Parenting Time Lawyers team. If you have a Dawson Creek or Fort St John family law dispute involving the best interests of the child pick up the phone and call us. You will be glad you did.
Dawson Creek Child Custody Parenting Time Lawyers
Fraser MacLean, of our Vancouver family law office explains that the child’s best interest in determining parenting arrangements will also be considered by the Courts, as a judge must only consider the child’s best interest in making Dawson Creek parenting orders. Section 37 of the Family Law Act states the following:
Best interests of child
37 (1) In making an agreement or order under this Part respecting guardianship, parenting arrangements or contact with a child, the parties and the court must consider the best interests of the child only.
(2) To determine what is in the best interests of a child, all of the child’s needs and circumstances must be considered, including the following:
(a)the child’s health and emotional well-being;
(b)the child’s views, unless it would be inappropriate to consider them;
(c)the nature and strength of the relationships between the child and significant persons in the child’s life;
(d)the history of the child’s care;
(e)the child’s need for stability, given the child’s age and stage of development;
(f)the ability of each person who is a guardian or seeks guardianship of the child, or who has or seeks parental responsibilities, parenting time or contact with the child, to exercise his or her responsibilities;
(g)the impact of any family violence on the child’s safety, security or well-being, whether the family violence is directed toward the child or another family member;
(h)whether the actions of a person responsible for family violence indicate that the person may be impaired in his or her ability to care for the child and meet the child’s needs;
(i)the appropriateness of an arrangement that would require the child’s guardians to cooperate on issues affecting the child, including whether requiring cooperation would increase any risks to the safety, security or well-being of the child or other family members;
(j)any civil or criminal proceeding relevant to the child’s safety, security or well-being.
(3) An agreement or order is not in the best interests of a child unless it protects, to the greatest extent possible, the child’s physical, psychological and emotional safety, security and well-being.
(4) In making an order under this Part, a court may consider a person’s conduct only if it substantially affects a factor set out in subsection (2), and only to the extent that it affects that factor.
Dawson Creek Child Custody Parenting Time Lawyers 250-262-5052
In the case N.R.G v. G.R.G., The B.C Court of Appeal determined that the trial judge did not use the proper approach in when determining the best interest of the children (s. 37 of the Family Law Act) and found that some orders made were instead focused on correcting the behaviour of the parents. The Court of Appeal further found that the trial judge made orders that went beyond the role of a judge in under the Family Law Act. The B.C Court of Appeal provided the following:
[41] In this case, we respectfully consider that the judge has erred in principle by taking upon himself the detail of parenting to an inappropriate degree, and by failing to establish who has the initial parental responsibility on the disputed matters.
[44] For the reasons below, we conclude the judge did not fully consider the best interests of the children as expressed in the governing legislation, s. 37 of the Family Law Act, and was diverted, in error, to ‘correction’ of the behaviours of the parents, in particular of the mother. The result has been living circumstances for the children that are unduly restrictive, unduly separate the children’s lives into two difficult-to-traverse silos, and fail to allow for development of skills and interests that are part of growing up and that prepare the child to become an adult. The result has also been assumption by the judge of a parenting role well beyond that contemplated under the Family Law Act.
As previously mentioned, when considering guardianship, parenting time, parental responsibilities, and contact with a child, the Court must only consider the best interest of a child.
