November 25, 2021 – Determining Decision-Making

“Having regard for all the variables that come into play in a particular family situation, when determining custody, access and the appropriate parental arrangement, it is important to note that no one statutory factor enjoys statutory pre-eminence. In Chin Pang, at para. 121, the court offered some useful questions to consider that are especially useful to the analysis of this case:

        1. the level of hostility between the parties, the extent to which that hostility could undermine the stability of the child, and what measures, if employed, would likely strip the hostility from the environment;
        2. the extent to which the person seeking access has laid down a track record of using contact to the child for a purpose entirely collateral to the child’s best interests; for example, to try to control or denigrate the parent of the parent’s partner;
        3. the extent to which the person displaying objectionable conduct has the ability and the motivation to alter the behaviour; and
        4. whether the parent is acting responsibly, reasonably, and in a child-focused fashion in an assessment of what is in the child’s best interests.

Decision-making, and in particular, the ability of the parents to engage in joint decision-making without conflict is another essential dimension for consideration when deciding on the parenting arrangements and whether to grant joint or sole custody to parents. For joint decision-making to occur, and by implication joint custody, the parents must be able to put their own differences aside and communicate effectively about the various decisions they have to make in relation to their children. Such communications would include each parent sharing of information about the children’s address with the other, selecting schools and then interacting with that school where needed, consulting with one another and considering the other’s views when selecting and contacting treating physicians, counsellors, or other supporting specialists who might be needed to support a child’s various health and welfare needs, where the family observes religion, then discussing whatever decisions are to be undertaken in that context, collaborating in the selection of extra-curricular activities, the parents’ attendance at such events, and co-ordinating of access time with the children.”

            Ahmad v. Ahmad, 2019 ONSC 6804 (CanLII) at 99-100