A Hamilton judge has scolded a pair of separated parents for behaving “unreasonably” - their children missed the first two weeks of school this year because they couldn’t agree on where to send them.
The decision - released last month by Justice Alex Pazaratz, who is known for his creatively written and sharply-worded judgments - centres on local parents who have joint custody of their daughter and son.
The 12-year-old and seven-year-old kids attended an east Hamilton school last year, but because neither parent lives in the school’s catchment area, they couldn’t return in September.
ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW
Neither parent knew that school wasn’t an option until just before this school year started, resulting in the kids missing the first nine days, according to the decision.
“If that sounds like poor parental planning, the failing is compounded by the fact that this is the second year in a row where these ... parents have had to go to court for a last-minute ruling on what should be a fundamental aspect of parenting,” Pazaratz wrote.
The mother wanted the children to attend a Hamilton Mountain school within walking distance of her home.
The father advocated for a central Hamilton school that is walkable from his place.
ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW
The parents have an equal-time arrangement concerning their children, and neither one works outside the home. Neither parent has a car, but the dad’s partner has one, which he was not sure if he could use, the decision reads.
The parents and their proposals were “evenly matched” in many ways, Pazaratz noted.
But the fact that the dad would likely be able to drive the kids to school tipped the scales in favour of the mom’s request, he said.
Choosing a school is not an easy decision, Pazaratz said, “but it’s an important one that should have been made long ago.”
“If parents who have ‘joint custody’ are intent on turning this issue into annual last-minute motions in family court, then maybe they’re not really ‘joint custody’ material,” he noted.
Two experts have outlined their take on the situation ...
Issues like this are “all too common,” said Rachel Birnbaum, a professor in childhood studies and social institutions and social work at King’s University College at Western University.
ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW
They can range from determining whether a child needs a haircut to if they should be allowed to get a body piercing, Birnbaum said.
But these issues should be dealt with using resources other than court time, including on-site mediation at courthouses, she said.
And depending on the ages of the children, they should also be consulted on these matters, Birnbaum said.
But it’s very unusual for these types of cases to make it to court, said Denise Whitehead, an assistant professor in the department of sexuality, marriage and family studies at St. Jerome’s University at the University of Waterloo.
“The vast majority of family law matters settle well before this,” she said.
Whitehead said these parents are an example of what’s called a “high-conflict” couple - a group that uses up the majority of court resources.
Shared parenting “absolutely can work,” said Whitehead, but not when people are unable to make “what should be the most obvious decisions.”
To join the conversation set a first and last name in your user profile.
Sign in or register for free to join the Conversation