CHILDREN WHO REJECT A PARENT
Parental estrangement, particularly when a child distances themselves from one parent, can have profound and lasting psychological effects. The absence of a parent in a child's life can lead to a myriad of emotional, social, and psychological challenges that persist well into adulthood.
In Ontario, judges are recognizing the gravity of this issue and are taking proactive steps to intervene through court-ordered reunification counselling. Ontario law recognizes that the bond between a parent and child is fundamental to a child's emotional development and well-being. When this bond is severed due to estrangement, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, the child can experience feelings of abandonment, confusion, and insecurity. This disruption in attachment can manifest in various ways, including low self-esteem, trust issues, difficulty forming healthy relationships, and even mental health disorders such as depression and anxiety.
One of the most significant long-term consequences of parental estrangement is the absence of a vital role model in the child's life. Parents serve as guides, mentors, and sources of emotional support, helping children navigate life's challenges and develop crucial life skills. Without the presence of one parent, children may struggle to develop a sense of identity, lacking the guidance and nurturing that both parents ideally provide.
Ontario judges have come to recognize how the rule of law can be used to counter the detrimental impact of parental estrangement on children and are actively seeking to use their powers to mitigate its effects. Court-ordered reunification counselling is one such intervention aimed at facilitating the reestablishment of a healthy parent-child relationship. This form of counselling provides a structured and supportive environment for both the parent and child to address underlying issues, rebuild trust and work towards reconciliation.
Reunification counselling is not about forcing a child to have a relationship with a parent against their will. Instead, it focuses on addressing the root causes of estrangement, which may include parental conflict, communication breakdowns, or unresolved emotional trauma. By providing a safe space for open dialogue and healing, reunification counselling empowers families to mend fractured relationships and move forward in a healthier manner.
Moreover, the involvement of trained mental health professionals in the reunification process ensures that the child's best interests remain paramount. These professionals can assess the family dynamics, identify any underlying issues contributing to the estrangement, and develop tailored strategies to facilitate reconciliation. Through ongoing support and guidance, reunification counselling offers hope for families grappling with the devastating effects of parental estrangement.
The statutory authority for reunification counseling in Ontario is the Children’s Law Reform Act at section 28 which states:
28(1) The court to which an application is made under section 21,
(a)? may by order grant,
(i)? decision-making responsibility with respect to a child to one or more persons, in the case of an application under clause 21 (1) (a) or subsection 21 (2),
(ii)? parenting time with respect to a child to one or more parents of the child, in the case of an application under clause 21 (1) (b), or
(iii)? contact with respect to a child to one or more persons other than a parent of the child, in the case of an application under subsection 21 (3);
(b)? may by order determine any aspect of the incidents of the right to decision-making responsibility, parenting time or contact, as the case may be, with respect to a child; and
(c)? may make any additional order the court considers necessary and proper in the circumstances, including an order,
(i)? limiting the duration, frequency, manner or location of contact or communication between any of the parties, or between a party and the child,
(ii)? prohibiting a party or other person from engaging in specified conduct in the presence of the child or at any time when the person is responsible for the care of the child,
(iii)? prohibiting a party from changing the child’s residence, school or day care facility without the consent of another party or an order of the court,
(iv)? prohibiting a party from removing the child from Ontario without the consent of another party or an order of the court,
领英推荐
(v)? requiring the delivery, to the court or to a person or body specified by the court, of the child’s passport, the child’s health card within the meaning of the?Health Insurance Act?or any other document relating to the child that the court may specify,
(vi)? requiring a party to give information or to consent to the release of information respecting the child’s well-being, including in relation to the child’s health and education, to another party or other person specified by the court, or
(vii)? requiring a party to facilitate communication by the child with another party or other person specified by the court in a manner that is appropriate for the child.
?
This was further explored in the case of Testani v. Haughton, 2016 ONSC 5827. This legal precedent granting the judge the power to grant reunification counseling or reunification therapy orders are not exclusive to parental alienation cases. However, the court's discretion in issuing such orders is underscored by several key considerations described in that case as follows:
1.???????????? Evidence of Benefit: There must be compelling evidence that reunification counseling will be beneficial.
2.???????????? Detailed Proposal: A detailed proposal identifying the proposed reunification counselor and expectations is crucial.
3.???????????? Resistance Consideration: Resistance to reunification counseling is a factor but not the sole determinant.
4.???????????? Pending Investigations: No order for reunification counseling should be made while clinical investigations or assessments are underway.
5.???????????? Appropriate Direction: Where possible, the court should provide appropriate direction to the reunification counselor/therapist, with a subsequent report to the court.
By juxtaposition, in the case of F.S. v. M.B.T., 2023 ONCJ 102 (CanLII), the judge considered a situation where such therapy was contra-indicated.? In that case, a father asked for an order for reunification counseling because he was estranged from his 12 year old daughter.? The judge, in assessing the specific case in light of the case of Testani, determined that reunification counseling was not in the child's best interests. Given the history of family violence and the lack of readiness from both the child and mother, the court acknowledged their justified resistance to this form of therapy. The court questioned the potential effectiveness of the therapy, expressing concerns about the father's limited insight and the willingness of all participants to engage in the process.
The court did however outline steps for the father to repair his relationship with the child. The court suggested that the father take a parenting course specific to pre-teens experiencing estrangement. The court emphasized that the father refrain from returning to court until this step was taken. Furthermore, the court proposed that the mother arrange individual counseling for the child, providing a safe space for her to navigate and process her feelings about her relationship with the father and permit the child to engage more comfortably in counseling without the pressure of legal proceedings.
In family law, the delicate matter of reunification counseling often arises in cases where estrangement or alienation casts a shadow over the parent-child relationship. The estrangement of a parent by a child can inflict long-term psychological damage, affecting the child's emotional well-being and future relationships. Ontario judges are taking proactive measures to address this issue by implementing court-ordered reunification counselling, where suitable, recognizing the importance of preserving parent-child bonds and safeguarding children's mental health. By prioritizing reconciliation and healing, these interventions offer families a chance to rebuild fractured relationships and create a brighter future together.
?
Steve Benmor, B.Sc, LL.B., LL.M. (Family Law), C.S., is the founder and principal lawyer of Benmor Family Law Group, a boutique matrimonial law firm in downtown Toronto.?He is a Certified?Specialist?in Family Law and was admitted as a Fellow to the prestigious International Academy of Family Lawyers. Steve is regularly retained as a Divorce Mediator, Arbitrator and Parenting Coordinator. As a?Divorce Mediator, Steve uses his 30 years of in-depth knowledge of family law,?court-room experience?and expert problem-solving skills in Divorce Mediation to help spouses reach fair, fast and cooperative divorce settlements without the financial losses, emotional costs and lengthy delays from divorce court.?You can find his CV at?https://benmor.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Steve_CV.pdf. He can be reached at [email protected]
CoMediator | Divorce, CoParenting, Prenups & Postnups | Trusts & Estates | 30+ Court | Now Online | Two-Coach Approach? | Quantum? | Empowering You to Solve Problems & Leap Forward | Proud Navy Vet, Dad, CoParent & Son
10 个月?????????? Steve, thanks for the post, especially the discussion about when reunification therapy is contraindicated. Your article highlights how important it is to address justified resistance and take proactive steps to improve the parent-child relationship by getting to the root cause of the estrangement, and not by prematurely/inappropriately forcing contact. I like how you’ve pointed out how this could involve parents recognizing when reunification therapy may not be appropriate, and how they may want to focus on building a foundation of trust and communication before pursuing such interventions. Your article lists proactive steps, such as a parent participating in classes specific to pre-teens experiencing estrangement, and arranging individual counseling for a child to provide a safe space for them to navigate their feelings about their relationship with their parent, without the pressure of legal proceedings. We’ve learned how this can help create a better environment in which to repair a relationship. This valuable information can assist practitioners in managing their clients' expectations and adopting a child-centric approach rather than pursuing a one-size-fits-all strategy. Great article! A must read.
Galina Psavka Realtor
10 个月Many children who reject a parent have valid reasons for it. Most often the reason for rejecting one parent is due to abuse from that parent. Family Lawyers/judges are not trained in detecting/handling abuse in family court. It seems that parents have all the rights, and children are given non. Nothing is as black and white as this post insinuates. My children and I have lived the horrors of family court, and continue to live in fear.
Expert Coparenting Guidance | Author of Coparenting Compass | Strategic Solutions & Actionable Insights for Effective Coparenting| Helping Motivated Parents Navigate Their Coparenting Journey Effectively
10 个月Overall, reunification therapy offers a promising path toward healing and remediation of parent-child contact issues. It's also important to note that in many cases, coparenting work is an essential part of the process, helping parents to collaborate effectively for the benefit of their children.