Quebec dad sued by daughter after grounding loses his appeal

[AngryAmish]

<http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2009/04/07/mtl-quebecgirl-sues-dad-0407.html>

"A Quebec father who was taken to court by his 12-year-old daughter after he grounded her in June 2008 has lost his appeal.

Quebec Superior Court rejected the Gatineau father's appeal of a lower court ruling that said his punishment was too severe for the wrongs he said his daughter committed."

read the whole thing -- too stup[d for words

[Orrex]

1. Is she an Indigo?

That case is pretty fucked up. When I was twelve, my parents didn't let me see Return of the Jedi fifteen times in the theater; perhaps I should have retained an attorney...

[happyslug]

2. Must be a very difficult case, the child was given a lawyer in the custody fight?

In ALL the custody fights I have been involved in no Judge ever even THOUGHT of giving a lawyer to the child INDEPENDENT of the child's parents. Now, providing the children lawyers is quite common in Children and Youth (CYS) Cases, but those involve endangerment of the child NOT Custody where both parents are viewed as able to take care of the Child. CYS MUST appoint a lawyer for the Children in its cases, for what the parents want and what CYS wants may NOT be in the children's best interest.

In this case the court had appointed a lawyer for the CHILD during the custody dispute. It is that lawyer who brought this action for the child. Something else is wrong here, I do NOT know, but the court must have had concerns as to the best interest of the child when it appointed a lawyer for her.

Now Quebec is a Civil Law Jurisdiction NOT a Common Law Jurisdiction (Louisiana is the other Civil Law Jurisdiction outside of Mexico on the North American Continent). Being a Civil Law Jurisdiction may have something to do with why the Lawyer was appointed. I do not know why a lawyer was appointed, but this is a strange case and the lawyer had to be appointed for some good reason in the eyes of the court, during the duration of the Custody dispute.

One last comment, custody disputes technically can end with a final decision by a Judge, the problem is that decision can be overturned whenever new factual situation, i.e. the child is a year older. Thus, while the courts keep saying they want to make final decisions in family court matters, they is almost never such a thing till the child turns 18, and the new factual situation that the child is an adult ends almost all custody disputes.

[dustbunnie]

4. I glossed over the judgement handed down by the Court of Appeals -

and you're right. It is a strange case. Apparently the animosity between the parents was/is so intense, that a lawyer was appointed for the girl, and presumably her twin brother, to protect their interests throughout the divorce. This new incident still has everything to do with the parents, who seem to share joint custody, and are using this trip/punishment to further torment each other. As this incident unfolded, the courts had a psychologist interview the children, parents, others involved, and s/he came to the conclusion that the children lived under tremendous stress instigated by the deep animosity and inability of the parents to put their differences aside in order to raise their children in a proper environment. Around that point my eyes glazed over and the writing started to read like a car manual so I stopped. But that was pretty much the gist of it, and why the courts got involved.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

5. Contested divorce cases in Texas have a lawyer for the children.

A lawyer who represents children in a divorce case is the attorney ad litem.

They are appointed by the judge. Each side pays one-half of the costs of the attorney.

Also, people who are declared incompetent by a probate judge have an attorney ad litem to represent them and guard their interests.

I have no idea what they do in Quebec. I assume that since they are French like Louisiana they are under the Code Napoleon which definitely does NOT give the wives equal rights to property.

[kiranon]

3. Father should give state custody of the child because he will have

no authority whatsoever in raising her during her teenage years.

[Luminous Animal]

6. If his punishment was disproportionate

to her behavior thus far, he already lost authority.

[Raineyb]

7. His punishment was not disproportionate

If he told the child to stay off the internet and she disobeyed him he had the right, no the duty to ground her ass. This idiotic court just made it impossible for the man to discipline his child because the lesson she learned is that if she doesn't like what her father says she can just take him to court.

If the trip was that damn important then she should have stayed off the god damned computer.

This is beyond stupid.

He might as well give the spoiled brat to the court since he won't have any authority over her.

Regards

[tkmorris]

10. Rainey you are exactly right, IMHO

This girl is far too immature to realize it, but this is probably the worst outcome their could have been for her. I sincerely doubt she will learn another shred of responsibility in her childhood, and children who reach adulthood as undisciplined as she is tend never to recover.

What the hell was the court thinking? When they start involving themselves in the day to day minutiae of parenting they have plain and simply lost the plot. What is next, court set bedtimes? If I want my daughter to eat her vegetables, will I have to hire a lawyer?

[McCamy Taylor]

8. Good for her. Parents think they own their children. Plenty of kids are more mature

and sensible than their parents, and that definitely appears to be the case in this situation given the description of the divorce. Grown up parents would never ever let their kids know that a divorce was anything more than amicable.

[aikoaiko]

9. Just goes to show -- even Canadians can be weird.

I love you Canadish peoples.