“It is critical for the Respondent father to take concrete steps to improve his relationship by focusing on his daughter’s needs and to gain the insight needed for him to do so. To this end, I order that the Respondent father attend counselling with a professional parenting specialist of his choice. This order is a permissible term of custody and access under s. 16(6) of the Divorce Act as it serves to promote the purpose of the Act which, amongst other things, is to protect a child’s emotional and psychological well-being. In making this order I am mindful of the Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision in Kaplanis v. Kaplanis, 2005 CanLII 1625 (ON CA), [2005] O.J. No. 275 which I distinguish on the basis that it required both parents to jointly see a counsellor who, amongst other things, would make decisions about choice of schools, activities and hobbies for the children. As Philip Epstein, Q.C., L.S.M., has also noted, the law permits a court to order counselling as incident of custody: Case Comment: L. (J.K.) v. S.(N.C.) and McAlister v. Jenkins, (2008), 54 R.F.L. (6th) 163.”: