“It is clear to the court based on the evidence filed that the respondent has been the parent who makes and takes the children to their doctor’s appointments and specialist appointments both prior to and after separation. It is further clear to the court that the lack of communication between the parties is primarily due to the applicant’s refusal to communicate with the respondent. I find that the lack of communication (or miscommunication) regarding the applicant’s recent trip to Pakistan was due solely to the applicant’s lack of respectful communication with the respondent.
The applicant should have known better and should have acted in a more mature manner to clarify the plans for the children to remain in the respondent’s care during his absence. He should have provided the respondent with clear contact information so they could plan some phone calls between him and the children during his absence. Sofia is just 8 years old and Ayesha is just 5 years old. Neither of them is of the age or maturity to relay any messages to their parents, let alone a message about their father’s trip to Pakistan. The children are further not equipped to take responsibility for a cell-phone and plan out long distance phone calls and messaging with their father while he was away.
To be crystal clear, NEITHER PARENT SHOULD EVER RELAY MESSAGES TO EACH OTHER THROUGH THE CHILDREN.
Based on the evidence filed and the above reasons, I find that there is sufficient evidence to satisfy the court that it is in the best interests of the children to make a temporary order granting the respondent decision making responsibility for both children.”