Ontario court says boy can have dad, mom — and mom
Patrick_Ross @ Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:36 pm
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/ ... court.html
$1:
Ontario court says boy can have dad, mom — and mom
A child can legally have three parents, Ontario's highest court ruled in a landmark decision Tuesday.
In the so-called "two-mother" ruling, the Ontario Court of Appeal said the biological mother of a five-year-old boy and her same-sex partner can both be legally recognized as mothers of the child. The boy's biological father is still recognized as his dad.
"It's not an academic issue; it's very much a practical issue," said the father's lawyer, Alf Mamo.
"If the biological parent is away, and the child gets sick and they have to go to the hospital, and the doctor wants the parent to sign a consent, there has to be the ability to do that," said Mamo.
Father would lose status if boy adopted
The boy's mother and her partner have been in a stable same-sex union since 1990. In 1999, they decided to begin a family with help from a friend, the court heard.
Both women were to be the child's primary caregivers, but believed it would be in the child's best interests for the biological father to be involved in his life.
The mother and her partner did not apply for an adoption order because, if they did so, the father would lose his status under the Child and Family Services Act, Ontario's legislation covering child protection and adoption, court heard.
"Perhaps one of the greatest fears faced by lesbian mothers is the death of the birth mother. Without a declaration of parentage or some other order, the surviving partner would be unable to make decisions for their minor child, such as critical decisions about health care."
'Gap' in laws revealed
The Appeal Court ruled that the provincial legislation dealing with issues of custody, the Children's Law Reform Act, no longer reflects current society.
"There is no doubt that the legislature did not foresee for the possibility of declarations of parentage for two women, but that is a product of the social conditions and medical knowledge at the time," they wrote.
The judges said a "gap in the legislation has been revealed," and the statute does not reflect the best interests of the child in this case.
"The act does not deal with, nor contemplate, the disadvantages that a child born into a relationship of two mothers, two fathers or as in this case two mothers and one father might suffer," the judges wrote.
The appellant's application to have the case heard was dismissed by a Superior Court justice in 2003 who said he didn't have jurisdiction to rule in the case.
A child can legally have three parents, Ontario's highest court ruled in a landmark decision Tuesday.
In the so-called "two-mother" ruling, the Ontario Court of Appeal said the biological mother of a five-year-old boy and her same-sex partner can both be legally recognized as mothers of the child. The boy's biological father is still recognized as his dad.
"It's not an academic issue; it's very much a practical issue," said the father's lawyer, Alf Mamo.
"If the biological parent is away, and the child gets sick and they have to go to the hospital, and the doctor wants the parent to sign a consent, there has to be the ability to do that," said Mamo.
Father would lose status if boy adopted
The boy's mother and her partner have been in a stable same-sex union since 1990. In 1999, they decided to begin a family with help from a friend, the court heard.
Both women were to be the child's primary caregivers, but believed it would be in the child's best interests for the biological father to be involved in his life.
The mother and her partner did not apply for an adoption order because, if they did so, the father would lose his status under the Child and Family Services Act, Ontario's legislation covering child protection and adoption, court heard.
"Perhaps one of the greatest fears faced by lesbian mothers is the death of the birth mother. Without a declaration of parentage or some other order, the surviving partner would be unable to make decisions for their minor child, such as critical decisions about health care."
'Gap' in laws revealed
The Appeal Court ruled that the provincial legislation dealing with issues of custody, the Children's Law Reform Act, no longer reflects current society.
"There is no doubt that the legislature did not foresee for the possibility of declarations of parentage for two women, but that is a product of the social conditions and medical knowledge at the time," they wrote.
The judges said a "gap in the legislation has been revealed," and the statute does not reflect the best interests of the child in this case.
"The act does not deal with, nor contemplate, the disadvantages that a child born into a relationship of two mothers, two fathers or as in this case two mothers and one father might suffer," the judges wrote.
The appellant's application to have the case heard was dismissed by a Superior Court justice in 2003 who said he didn't have jurisdiction to rule in the case.
hwacker @ Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:43 pm
Why not 6 moms and 14 dads?
The legal battles should be worth the price of admission later.
Firecat @ Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:47 pm
hwacker hwacker:
Why not 6 moms and 14 dads?
The legal battles should be worth the price of admission later.
The legal battles should be worth the price of admission later.
I suppose those would be valid concerns in the event of polygamy but that has nothing to do with same-sex marriage issue and the legal ramifications it has. Gaps in law that arise have to have test cases to establish precedents. That's all this is.
Patrick_Ross @ Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:51 pm
You think maybe we could put them on Pay-per-view to help bring in extra revenue for the government?
Here's the only part of this I really have a problem with:
$1:
Father would lose status if boy adopted
The boy's mother and her partner have been in a stable same-sex union since 1990. In 1999, they decided to begin a family with help from a friend, the court heard.
Both women were to be the child's primary caregivers, but believed it would be in the child's best interests for the biological father to be involved in his life.
The mother and her partner did not apply for an adoption order because, if they did so, the father would lose his status under the Child and Family Services Act, Ontario's legislation covering child protection and adoption, court heard.
The boy's mother and her partner have been in a stable same-sex union since 1990. In 1999, they decided to begin a family with help from a friend, the court heard.
Both women were to be the child's primary caregivers, but believed it would be in the child's best interests for the biological father to be involved in his life.
The mother and her partner did not apply for an adoption order because, if they did so, the father would lose his status under the Child and Family Services Act, Ontario's legislation covering child protection and adoption, court heard.
I would say that a revision of adoption laws to deal with this type of situation is in order. There is no way the biological father should automatically lose his status as a legal parent in the case of an adoption.
hwacker @ Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:53 pm
oh polygamy will come with this joke the liberals have given us.
Firecat @ Wed Jan 03, 2007 2:00 pm
Patrick_Ross Patrick_Ross:
You think maybe we could put them on Pay-per-view to help bring in extra revenue for the government?
Here's the only part of this I really have a problem with:
I would say that a revision of adoption laws to deal with this type of situation is in order. There is no way the biological father should automatically lose his status as a legal parent in the case of an adoption.
Here's the only part of this I really have a problem with:
$1:
Father would lose status if boy adopted
The boy's mother and her partner have been in a stable same-sex union since 1990. In 1999, they decided to begin a family with help from a friend, the court heard.
Both women were to be the child's primary caregivers, but believed it would be in the child's best interests for the biological father to be involved in his life.
The mother and her partner did not apply for an adoption order because, if they did so, the father would lose his status under the Child and Family Services Act, Ontario's legislation covering child protection and adoption, court heard.
The boy's mother and her partner have been in a stable same-sex union since 1990. In 1999, they decided to begin a family with help from a friend, the court heard.
Both women were to be the child's primary caregivers, but believed it would be in the child's best interests for the biological father to be involved in his life.
The mother and her partner did not apply for an adoption order because, if they did so, the father would lose his status under the Child and Family Services Act, Ontario's legislation covering child protection and adoption, court heard.
I would say that a revision of adoption laws to deal with this type of situation is in order. There is no way the biological father should automatically lose his status as a legal parent in the case of an adoption.
I believe what this ruling does is effectively avoiding that loss of parental rights for the father. With this ruling the child effectively automatically has three parents each of whom have equal rights that are then determined by cutody agreement. As part of joint custody agreements, there are separate definitions to custodial rights and guardianship. This will allow the legal underpinnings to include the "second" mother.
Patrick_Ross @ Wed Jan 03, 2007 2:20 pm
That can't be allowed to stand at that, or else we basically have our judiciary legislating in the place of elected legislators. Basically, the law needs to be debated and revised in Parliament.
Banff @ Wed Jan 03, 2007 2:43 pm
Biological parents should always rule nothing should stand in the way of that and there is nothing wrong with the added help . Its kind of a victory story .
Firecat @ Wed Jan 03, 2007 3:10 pm
Patrick_Ross Patrick_Ross:
That can't be allowed to stand at that, or else we basically have our judiciary legislating in the place of elected legislators. Basically, the law needs to be debated and revised in Parliament.
Ah the "judiciary making law" complaint.
The courts do not make law: they listen to two sides of a debate carefully researched and prepared, as presented by people whose profession is the close study of law. These dispassionate advocates present to dispassionate arbitrators arguments based on existing law and precedents.
Each side presents their findings from every existing law Parliament has ever passed and every legal precedent that affects a question at hand.
The court then rules on how those laws interact with each other. These unforeseen permutations are precisely why Parliament must be very careful with the laws they enact.
Patrick_Ross @ Wed Jan 03, 2007 3:33 pm
It's a legitimate complaint. We don't elect judges to pass legislation -- we elect our members of Parliament for that purpose.
If we could govern the country via court decisions and precedent, there wouldn't be any need for legislatures. Fortunately, the country cannot be governed as such.
In essence, we need the government to occasionally act as a "leash" on the judiciary as much as we need the judiciary to occasionally act as a "leash" on the government.
Clogeroo @ Wed Jan 03, 2007 3:34 pm
It must be odd growing up with two mothers. I'm glad I never had to go through that. I would probably be just embarrassed about it. Imagine inviting some friends over and saying this is my mum and my other mum. I suppose it could be better than just having a single parent. I still think having one father and one mother is optimal though. Both genders provide different support and give different perspectives on life.
Firecat @ Wed Jan 03, 2007 5:00 pm
Clogeroo Clogeroo:
It must be odd growing up with two mothers. I'm glad I never had to go through that. I would probably be just embarrassed about it. Imagine inviting some friends over and saying this is my mum and my other mum. I suppose it could be better than just having a single parent. I still think having one father and one mother is optimal though. Both genders provide different support and give different perspectives on life.
It's so not a big deal to kids now.
Firecat @ Wed Jan 03, 2007 5:02 pm
Patrick_Ross Patrick_Ross:
It's a legitimate complaint. We don't elect judges to pass legislation -- we elect our members of Parliament for that purpose.
If we could govern the country via court decisions and precedent, there wouldn't be any need for legislatures. Fortunately, the country cannot be governed as such.
In essence, we need the government to occasionally act as a "leash" on the judiciary as much as we need the judiciary to occasionally act as a "leash" on the government.
If we could govern the country via court decisions and precedent, there wouldn't be any need for legislatures. Fortunately, the country cannot be governed as such.
In essence, we need the government to occasionally act as a "leash" on the judiciary as much as we need the judiciary to occasionally act as a "leash" on the government.
But they aren't writing law - they are applying the law.
Arctic_Menace @ Wed Jan 03, 2007 5:03 pm
$1:
It must be odd growing up with two mothers. I'm glad I never had to go through that. I would probably be just embarrassed about it.
Or maybe you wouldn't, because that is what you grew up around.
Should I be embarassed because I grew up in a broken home, while many of my friends did not? Even if growing up I was raised pretty much by my mother, and wouldn't have cared?
Arctic_Menace @ Wed Jan 03, 2007 5:05 pm
$1:
It must be odd growing up with two mothers. I'm glad I never had to go through that. I would probably be just embarrassed about it. Imagine inviting some friends over and saying this is my mum and my other mum. I suppose it could be better than just having a single parent. I still think having one father and one mother is optimal though. Both genders provide different support and give different perspectives on life.
Another thing...
Why would a kid be embarassed about introducing his/her friend to two people who he/she loves very much?
This is why the whole SSM debate is such bullshit...