Keeping daughter in Sault Ste. Marie poses significant risks to daughter's wellbeing, ruling says
A recent decision by the Superior Court of Justice of Ontario provided that a 10-year-old girl should relocate to Hornepayne with her father instead of residing with her mother in Sault Ste. Marie.
In this case, the couple married in 2013 and lived in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario. Their daughter was born in 2014. Following their separation in 2021, the parents agreed on shared decision-making but disagreed over where the child should live.
The father argued that the daughter would benefit from moving to Hornepayne, Ontario, where she could experience greater stability. He identified the mother’s mental health struggles and the child’s school absences as reasons for the relocation.
The mother opposed the move, sought spousal support, and agreed that child support would depend on where the daughter would reside. She stressed that she had a stable job and a strong support network in Sault Ste. Marie, where the child had always lived. She acknowledged her mental health issues but claimed that they were under control and not negatively impactful to the daughter.
The court examined a series of incidents between the parents that allegedly shed light on the mother’s mental state. One event involved the mother sending threatening text messages to the father, who got the police and the Children's Aid Society involved.
During its investigation, the society allowed the mother only supervised access to the daughter. The father then moved the child to Hornepayne and enrolled her in school there. The society later cleared the mother and ended its involvement in the dispute.
In T.W. v. C.B., 2024 ONSC 4169, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice issued a decision deeming it in the child’s best interests to shift her primary residence from Sault Ste. Marie to Hornepayne, where she would live with her father.
The court ruled that the stability offered by the father’s plan outweighed the benefits of keeping her in Sault Ste. Marie. The court highlighted the importance of the daughter’s Indigenous heritage and the support that she would receive from her paternal relatives in Hornepayne.
On the other hand, the court held that the environment in Sault Ste. Marie posed emotional and psychological risks to the child. The court expressed concerns over the mother’s alcohol use, her temper, and the impact of her behaviour on the child.
In its decision, the court accepted that relocating to Hornepayne would be a significant change for the daughter. The court also acknowledged that both parents loved their child and kept her wellbeing in mind.
The court ordered that the mother would have parenting time during the summer, on alternate weekends during the school year, and during specified holidays. The court also set guidelines for Christmas and March break parenting time and allowed for make-up time if necessary. The court said that it would address the issues of child and spousal support at a later hearing.
