Our Family Law professionals at Progressive Legal Solutions deal with the parenting time issues on a daily basis. It was formerly referred to as “access”. Also, our lawyers constantly deal with decision-making and provide guidance on children supervision. It was formerly referred to as “custody”. Each situation is unique and depends on many factors. The judges consider those factors when they conduct the “best interests of the child” analysis. It is the the guiding and main legal test in deciding these issues.
The legislation and caselaw provide a list of factors that the court will consider in deciding what is the appropriate parenting schedule and what is the appropriate decision-making framework for the parties. Supervision of children can be one of those factors, especially critical for children supervision.
Section 16(3) of the Divorce Act, RSC 1985, c 3 (2nd Supp), identifies the factors relevant to the determination of the best interests of the child for the purposes of parenting time of the children in married couples. Proper children supervision is always a key factor.
Section 16(2) of the Divorce Act, RSC 1985, c 3 (2nd Supp) stipulates that the court “shall give primary consideration to the child’s physical, emotional and psychological safety, security and well-being.” Proper supervision of children is an important aspect of this consideration.
Similar factors and the same legal analysis are applicable to the children of non-married parents. However, a different legislation governs them. It is the Children’s Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1990 c. C12, s. 24(6). In every case involving parental rights, children supervision is essential.
When Courts Order Child Supervision
There is consensus in the case law that an order for supervised access is an exceptional order. As a general rule, courts have taken the view that because supervised access creates an artificial environment for the children, judges should not order it as a long-term access arrangement. However, in some cases, the supervision of children becomes necessary. It ensures the safety and well-being of the children under supervision.
The case of M.(B.P.) v. M.(B.L.D.E.), 1992 CanLII 8642, [1992] O.J. No. 2299, 1992 CarswellOnt 295 (C.A.) at para 80..), leave to appeal to S.C.C. ref’d [1993] 3 S.C.R. vii, underscores this proposition in which Abella J.A. stated (at para. 80): “The purpose of supervised access, far from being a permanent feature of a child’s life, is to provide “a temporary and time-limited measure designed to resolve a parental impasse over access. It should not be used … as a long-term remedy”: Norris Weisman, “On Access after Parental Separation” (1992), 36 R.F.L. (3d) 35 at 74.”
Children Family Law Services Barrie, Richmond Hill, Toronto & GTA
Child Support
Decision-Making Authority
Parenting Time and Access
Relocation and Mobility Rights
Urgent Motions
