Ontario Family Law Blog : Barrie Lawyer & Attorney Brian Galbraith : Simcoe County, Canada Divorce, Separation, and Collaborative Law

Have you ever believed that Hollywood stars live charmed lives? They seem so powerful, beautiful, rich, and confident. Yet, real pain and disappointment can creep into their lives - just like it does in our lives. They have choices to make, just like you and me.

Academy Award winner Sandra Bullock must have felt thrilled when she won an Oscar for her performance in the blockbuster "The Blindside". Yet, within a couple of weeks of her big win, her husband admitted to acts of infidelity.

Wow! Can you imagine the impact; she went from being on top of the world to the depths of despair all within a few days. But that's life. Whether you are a Hollywood or just regular guy or gal.

The question for Sandra Bullock is whether she will be able to maintain a relationship with her husband's children. According to a story in Jeffrey Cottrill's blog at the Divorce Magazine website, Sandra relished her relationship with Jesse James' three children. She was especially close to his six year old daughter Sunny.

Micheal in Niren and Associates Blog explains what would happen if Bullock and James were living in Ontario and Sandra Bullock sought an order for custody of Sunny in Court here:

If Bullock and James were Ontario residents and Bullock requested custody of Sunny,  the courts would look at whether Bullock provided financially for the child, the nature of their relationship and whether Bullock had maintained in both private and public life that she was Sunny’s parent and acted in such a manner. After determining whether Bullock was indeed a parent to Sunny, the courts would have to look at other factors to determine how custody between Bullock and James would play out. His behavior may not make him an unfit parent by default, but it may be considered if it hurt Sunny in any way or affected his ability to act as a parent.

Both Bullock and James would then have to make their case as to their relationship with the child, their willingness to raise and take care of the child and how they plan to do so, the stability of their homes and other factors. Blood relations are also considered, as is the choice of the child herself.

Frankly, the outcome is difficult to predict. Biological parents are generally preferred over step- parents but if the Court believed it was in Sunny's best interests that Bullock have custody, it is possible she would win. Surprisingly, Sunny's biological mother is rumoured to be willing to support Bullock if she starts a court battle.

Court is a battle. As a former litigator, I remember I was either "chucking or ducking". Chucking mud at the other side or trying to duck from the lobs coming my way. Everyone hated Court. The animosity between the parents usually escalated and in the end often the parents could not even imagine parenting cooperatively . It was a mess. The biggest loser was the children. Kids suffer when their parents are fighting whether face-to-face or through lawyers in Court.

Mr. Justice Harvey Brownstone, is in his stunningly brilliant book entitled "Tug of War: A Judge's Verdict on Separation, Custody Battles, and The Bitter Realities of Family Court", strongly attacks the court system declaring it should be the place of last resort to resolve custody and access issues... and this is from a judge who has been presiding over family law cases for over 14 years. 

Justice Brownstone asks in his book "how can two parents who love their child allow a total stranger to make crucial decisions about their child's living arrangements, health, education, extracurricular activities, vacation time, and degree of contact with each parent?"

If Bullock and James take their case to Court with traditional lawyers, it will be a huge mess. It will take months or even years to resolve. Can you imagine the turmoil, pain and grief for their little girl? She will be in the spotlight for months as the matter creeps through the court system. Her biological mother, a former Penthouse model, is presently in jail for tax evasion. What a start to life for little Sunny. Fighting. Pain. Anger. Jail. Court. Ugh.

If Sandra Bullock came to me, I would recommend the Collaborative Team Process.

Mr. Justice Brownstone describes the Collaborative process in his book as follows:

In the Collaborative family law process, the parents and their lawyers work together as members of a settlement team, rather than working against each other as opposing parties....The parents learn to focus on their common interests, understand each others perspective and concerns, exchange information, treat each other with respect, and explore the widest possible range of choices.

I would represent Ms Bullock's interests and Jesse James would retain his own Collaboratively trained lawyer. We would find a Divorce Coach for them who would help both parties work through the huge emotional issues related to the end of their marriage.

I would want Bullock to work through her emotional issues with the Divorce Coach so they won't create an impediment to the resolution of the parenting issues. Many times anger about an affair fuels a fight about the children in court. I would not want that for my client.

Bullock and James would then jointly retain a Parenting Coach who is a social worker with special training in the needs of children going through a divorce. The Parenting Coach would probably meet with Sunny to get to know her needs and meet with Bullock and James together and separately. The Divorce Coach would then discuss resolution of the parenting issues with the parties, sharing the recent research into the best interests of children in these situations. The negotiations would be difficult, no doubt, but they would be future-oriented, respectful, private and all about finding the best solution for Sunny's future. As in most Collaborative cases, I would expect we would achieve a negotiated settlement.

If there is some aspect of the parenting arrangements that Bullock and James cannot reach agreement on, we would jointly retain someone to act as an arbitrator who would resolve the issue. The arbitrator's decision would be final and binding - just like a court order. No need to go to Court for difficult issues.

The Collaborative Team Practice process has many bumps in the road to settlement but eventually, like in most cases, Bullock and James would work out an agreement that they craft. It wouldn't be decided by a stranger (a judge) but rather by the clients with the help of their team of professionals. It would be a resolution that meets both party's core concerns. The cost would be less than if they went to court and the resolution would likely be achieved faster.

What do you think Sunny would prefer happen: a huge bloody, drawn out, public court battle or a private, respectful Collaborative settlement?

I think Sunny would be proud of her parents if they were able to negotiate an agreement for her sake so if you are speaking to Sandra Bullock... give her my number. I am here to help.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

WHAT IS PARENTAL ALIENATION AND WHY IS IT SO BAD?

There is an old African proverb that states “when two elephants fight it is the grass under their feet that suffers”. Similarly, when parents fight over custody and access of their children after a separation it is the children that suffer. In many cases the parents are not even aware of the effect that their custody battle is having on their children and they do not intend to hurt their children. Nevertheless, research shows that children who have lived through a high conflict divorce have a greater tendency to develop mental health issues, addiction issues, are less likely to obtain a post secondary education and have a whole host of other social problems that develop later on in their lives as a result of their negative experience.

In some of the more extreme high conflict custody cases, a dynamic develops whereby one of the parents sets out to sever the children’s ties to the other parent. The American psychiatrist who first coined the phrase “parental alienation” described it as, “a disorder that arises primarily in the context of child custody disputes. Its primary manifestation is the child’s campaign of denigration against a parent, a campaign that has no justification. It results from the combination of a programming parent’s indoctrinations and the child’s own contributions to the vilification of the target parent.”

Some of the symptoms of Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) which will be added as a diagnosis under the DSM in 2010, are as follows:

The alienated child:

·         Sees one parent as all good and other parent as all bad;

·         Appears to really hate “bad parent” and hates their family and even their pets

·         Feels no guilt about hating parent or treating him/her badly

·         When they talk about alienated parent appear to be putting on a show – affect does not match their words

·         Worries about non alienated parent and is protective of them

·         Blames alienated parent for the divorce

The alienating parent:

·         Allows child to make decisions regarding access

·         Does not encourage access or contact with alienated parent and gives child silent treatment after access visits

·         Tries to delete memory of other parent by taking away pictures of other parent and not speaking about them.

·         Will not let alienated parent come to door or speak with them alone- treats alienated parent as if he/she is dangerous

·         Does not tell alienated parent about special events or school activities involving child

·         Withholds gifts, mail and voice messages from other parent and will not tell child about it.

·         Rewrites family history sometimes to involve stories of sexual and physical abuse by other parent

·         Involves child in litigation by reading court documents to him/her and or using child as messenger

·         Puts child in position where he/she is forced to choose between their parents

As with most things in life, there is a wide spectrum of severity and the blame usually does not fall on one person’s shoulders only. The “alienated parent” often contributes to the problem by making the child feel guilty, rejecting the child, acting aggressively towards the child or to the other parent or by simply giving up hope and abandoning the child. Also, some children are estranged from a parent prior to the separation and it only gets worse after wards. The alienating parents often act the way they do because they feel that they have been abandoned by the other parent and are very hurt by the separation. They themselves may have been abandoned or abused as children.

Richard Gardner and some of his followers are of the view that the only cure to this problem is to take the child out of the custody of the alienating parent, subject the child to intense counseling to de-brainwash the child and then place the child in the alienated parent’s custody. 

Not surprisingly, there are many family court judges who do not accept that this is the only solution to the problem. Instead, they try to affect a change in the dynamic by making access orders enforceable by the police, making a parent who is withholding access pay a fine or even ordering that the alienating parent go to jail if they breach the access order again.

In the US there are some residential programs available for families with this problem. In Canada, there are therapists who specialize in assisting families with this problem, but there are no residential programs that I am aware of.

In my view the essential thing is to prevent the alienation from happening in the first place. This can be done by identifying the early symptoms and ensuring that there is an access plan in place very shortly after the separation that is strongly enforced by the court. It is also essential that all parties involved get counseling to identify the issues that are at the root of the problem and bring them to the surface and that professionals involved in helping parents who are separating and divorcing are trained to recognize the early symptoms.

There have been recent amendments made to the Children’s Law Reform Act to reinforce the idea that maximum contact with both parents is generally in the best interests of children and that parents have an obligation not only to allow access, but to facilitate that access.

If you are fearful that this dynamic may be occurring in your family, please don’t wait for things to get better. Parental alienation is like cancer- if left untreated it will grow and kill your relationship with your child. Children in families where there is this dynamic are “victims” of abuse and end up exhibiting the same symptoms as children who are physically and sexually abused by their family members. You have a responsibility to protect your children from this abuse, as do all the professionals who are involved in your case.

The new provisions of legislation in Ontario are as follows:

34 (2) If the court is satisfied that the responding party wrongfully denied the moving party access to the child, the court may, by order,

(a) require the responding party to give the moving party compensatory access to the child for the period agreed to by the parties, or for the period the court considers appropriate if the parties do not agree;

(b) require supervision as described in section 34;

(c) require the responding party to reimburse the moving party for any reasonable expenses actually incurred as a result of the wrongful denial of access;

(d) appoint a mediator in accordance with section 31 as if the motion were an application for access. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.12, s. 83.

Period of compensatory access

(3)  A period of compensatory access shall not be longer than the period of access that was wrongfully denied. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.12, s. 83.

What constitutes wrongful denial of access

(4)  A denial of access is wrongful unless it is justified by a legitimate reason such as one of the following:

1. The responding party believed on reasonable grounds that the child might suffer physical or emotional harm if the right of access were exercised.

2. The responding party believed on reasonable grounds that he or she might suffer physical harm if the right of access were exercised.

3. The responding party believed on reasonable grounds that the moving party was impaired by alcohol or a drug at the time of access.

4. The moving party failed to present himself or herself to exercise the right of access within one hour of the time specified in the order or the time otherwise agreed on by the parties.

5. The responding party believed on reasonable grounds that the child was suffering from an illness of such a nature that it was not appropriate in the circumstances that the right of access be exercised.

6. The moving party did not satisfy written conditions concerning access that were agreed to by the parties or that form part of the order for access.

7. On numerous occasions during the preceding year, the moving party had, without reasonable notice and excuse, failed to exercise the right of access.

8. The moving party had informed the responding party that he or she would not seek to exercise the right of access on the occasion in question. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.12, s. 83.

Motion re failure to exercise of right of access, etc.

(5)  A person in whose favour an order has been made for custody of a child and who claims that a person in whose favour an order has been made for access to the child has, without reasonable notice and excuse, failed to exercise the right of access or to return the child as the order requires, may make a motion for relief under subsection (6) to the court that made the access order. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.12, s. 83.

Order for relief

(6)  If the court is satisfied that the responding party, without reasonable notice and excuse, failed to exercise the right of access or to return the child as the order requires, the court may, by order,

(a) require supervision as described in section 34;

(b) require the responding party to reimburse the moving party for any reasonable expenses actually incurred as a result of the failure to exercise the right of access or to return the child as the order requires;

(c) appoint a mediator in accordance with section 31 as if the motion were an application for access. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.12, s. 83.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Have you ever fallen in love with something only to have it break, get lost or stolen? Maybe it was a special coffee mug, a favorite blanket or a stuffed toy. Gone forever.

I remember having an emotional attachment to special belt buckle. When it was lost, I was at first angry and then I almost cried. Eventually I felt silly for becoming so attached to a "thing".

In hindsight,  I now realize that it wasn't the belt buckle that was special but rather it was the memories it represented.

It was the first buckle I ever won showing horses. It represented hours of hard work and dedication to achieve a goal. As a teenager, it was very special to me.

The division of household contents is often a contentious issue when clients are separating or divorcing. Normally clients lament the cost of replacing items but, in most cases, if you drill deep enough, it is an emotional loss that fuels the fight. It's not really about "the thing".

For example, spending thousands of dollars on legal fees fighting over a used electric kettle worth $2.00 does not make sense on the basis of the value of the item but if that kettle represents the hopes and dreams of domestic bliss or memories of happier days, its value is priceless.

Perhaps fighting over your kettle is your way to avenge the hurt caused by your spouse. There are many reasons for steamy conversations about a kettle but ask yourself "what is the real issue here?"

I encourage clients when thinking about the division of household contents to ask themselves "In five years, will it matter to me if I have this item or not?"

"Fifteen years from now, will I be proud to tell my grandchildren about how we resolved the division of household contents?"

This helps you make priorities and keep things in perspective. Things of a lesser priority can be bargained away to get things of greater importance. Deals can be made and settlement achieved, cost-effectively.

Jason Brown in his blog at Minnesota Divorce and Family Law Blog has an excellent article in which he lists some great methods for dividing up the household contents. He suggests the following:

* Two Lists: One of you makes two lists of items, of roughly equal value. The lists are presented to the other. The person who didn't draft the lists gets to pick which list they want. There is an incentive for the person drafting to fairly and equitably divide things or they'll get burned during the selection process.

* Silent Auction: This is my favorite. A master list of all of your personal property is created. Each party blindly puts a dollar value next to each item. The high bid takes the item at the value listed. Once all items are bid on, the totals for each party are added up. The party receiving the higher dollar value pays the other a cash equalizer to make up the other's shortfall. Parties are free to place a high value on items they really want, but won't list a ridiculous bid out of fear of paying a large offset.

* Arbitration: An arbitrator is basically a private judge. You pay this person, usually a lawyer, to listen to your side of things in an informal conference setting. Then, your spouse does the same. The arbitrator is given the authority to divide the entire list of items as they deem fair and equitable. Costs are saved because the parties attend the arbitration without counsel and divide the arbitrator's fee. Most couples submit to binding arbitration so that the decision of the arbitrator is final.

* Rotating Lists: Make a master list and take turns going back and fourth until all of the personal property is divided. Flip a coin to see who goes first.

However you divide up your things, remember you won't get everything you want and that's okay.  It just creates the new challenge of finding replacement items for reasonable prices. You can always go to garage sales or look online for bargains at Craigslist or  Kijiji. Shop around. You'll be surprised how little it will cost and how much fun it is to replace those missing items.

In ten years most of the stuff you are arguing about will be safely lodged in a dump somewhere, rotting away to eternity. It really isn't worth the cost or energy to fight over them now.

So save yourself from paying legal fees. Don't fight about your household contents. Just go replace your old junk with other people's old junk... and make them part of your "new home"... a place for "new memories".

... but if you see my belt buckle, shoot me an email. I still miss it!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Why should you refer your divorcing clients, patients and friends to a Collaborative lawyer?

Here is why….

Doctors, Dentists, Health Care Practitioners: You know that a divorce battle is one of the most stressful events in a patient's life, especially for their children. You give your patients the gift of a less stressful way to divorce, promoting good health,  if you refer them to a Collaborative lawyer. You will be a hero.

Marriage counselors, therapists: You know the destructive impact of divorce battle on families, especially children. You are giving your clients the gift of a healthier way of untangling their relationships with better prospects for a healthier relationship post-separation when you refer your clients to a Collaborative lawyer. You will be a hero.

Non-Family Law Lawyers: You know that a good referral to a client will solidify their trust in you. You can't give a better referral than to a Collaborative lawyer who uses a process that costs less, results in better settlements, is less destructive and is faster than the court system. You will be a hero.

Accountants, bookkeepers, financial planners, bankers: You know that a divorce battle can result in the destruction of the wealth you helped your clients accumulate and tear apart relationships between business partners. You give your clients the gift of a faster, more cost-effective way of resolving divorce issues thus preserving your client's wealth when you refer them to a Collaborative lawyer. You will be a hero.

Real estate agents, mortgage brokers: You know how difficult it is to facilitate a sale or purchase of a home when your clients are in a court battle. You give your clients the gift of a smoother resolution of divorce issues, including those related to the sale of their home, by referring your clients to a Collaborative lawyer. You will be a hero.

Priests, Rabbis, Ministers: You know that divorce is a reality for many in your congregations and can bring out the worst in them, leading them away from their faith. You give the members of your congregation the gift of a way of resolving divorce related issues that is more peaceful, respectful and dignified when you refer them to a Collaborative lawyer. You will be a hero.

Hairdressers, bartenders, personal trainers: You know all the stories of destruction and unimaginable costs to individuals, families and children by divorce battles. You give your clients the gift of a less destructive way of separating when you refer them to a Collaborative lawyer. You will be a hero.

Friends, family, acquaintances: You know the pain and costs of a divorce battle. You are giving a gift of a better way to resolve separation issues when you refer someone to a Collaborative lawyer. You will be a hero.

Heros... remember to make sure the lawyer you refer your clients, family and friends to actually has training in Collaborative Practice. Not all family law lawyers have the special training. They might say they are “collaborative” meaning they try to settle their cases before trial. Special skills, an intense commitment to settlement and an in depth knowledge of the process are necessary to be a true Collaborative Lawyer and that comes with training. Our association lists those with training in Simcoe County. The international association, the IACP, also lists criteria for practicing members.

Refer someone to a Collaborative lawyer.

Be a hero.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link