“When I finally got to know my father, I was actually shocked to discover how much alike we were. We thought the same way, we shared the same passions for entrepreneurship and creativity. And I discovered a relationship I never could have imagined. But I had lost almost twenty-five years with my dad.”
MP Tamara Jansen shared her story about being a child of divorce, and a child whose father was kept away despite having her best interests in mind, with a Parliamentary Committee. The Committee was reviewing Bill C-223, which could significantly change the way that difficult family situations are handled in court.
Bill C-223
Bill C-223, an Act to ensure the protection of children, addresses situations where children suffer the divorce of their parents and a judge must make decisions about parenting time and responsibility. The bill addresses the risk of family violence and coercive control by one parent over the children and potentially the other parent.
Sadly, situations of family violence are a reality of our broken world. And that can take a variety of forms. Consequently, judges must make decisions about how much time a child can spend with each divorced parent.
Parental Alienation
One of the challenges Bill C-223 addresses is parental alienation, which MP Jansen was commenting on directly, as quoted above.
Parental alienation is where one parent deliberately tries to poison a child’s mind against the other parent or prevent a child from maintaining a relationship with the other parent. This is often done through false or exaggerated information and sometimes through accusations of abuse or violence so that the child fears or rejects the alienated parent.
Normally, evidence that a parent has tried or is trying to alienate a child from the other parent counts against them when it comes to custody and visitation orders made by a judge. But Bill C-223 would change that, forbidding judges to consider allegations of parental alienation.
The bill states, “In determining what is in the best interests of the child, the court shall not take into consideration any allegation that a spouse has, or is likely to, through deliberate manipulation, persuade or encourage a child to become estranged from or resist contact with the other spouse.”
The bill is rightly concerned about situations of family violence. A spouse and children should be protected from violence and abuse. But it is important for judges to consider all relevant factors and allegations. That includes understanding whether parental alienation is happening. If a court ignores it, a child may lose a parent who ought to be involved in his life.
The Importance of Both Parents
God created marriage. The family flows out of that relationship. As we read in the creation mandate in Genesis 1:27-28: “God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. And God blessed them. And God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.’” God’s design for the family points to the importance of both mother and father.
Social scientific evidence demonstrates this. Children do best when they are raised by their married, biological mother and father. For example, children who grow up without their mother and or father are 20 times more likely to end up in prison, 9 times more likely to drop out of high school, and 5 times more likely to die by suicide.
Children have a right, as much as is possible, to their biological father and mother. That means a court must not exclude one parent without considering every relevant factor. Bill C-223 has two other noteworthy elements in this regard.
First, the bill says that when a court is allocating parenting time, it must not presume that it is in a child’s best interest to maintain contact with each parent, or that an equal parenting arrangement is in the child’s best interest
Second, the bill reduces opportunities for reconciliation between the spouses. Currently, the court must satisfy itself that there is no possibility of reconciliation, and the court may push for reconciliation if that seems possible. Bill C-223 would not allow a judge to offer or recommend steps toward reconciliation.
The ideal scenario, for both parents and children, is reconciliation. Barring that, the presumption should be – in the absence of abuse – that the child maintains a relationship with both parents. Both mother and father matter for a child’s upbringing and wellbeing.
Of course, because of sin, the ideal is not always possible. Christians recognize that sin must be dealt with and children and spouses must be protected from its effects. But the law must take God’s design for the family as the starting point and the norm to preserve or recover where possible.
Conclusion
Courts need to be able to hear all relevant information to make the best decisions possible.
Bill C-223 is currently being studied at the House of Commons Justice Committee. After that study is complete, it will go to 3rd reading in the House of Commons and then to the Senate if approved by the House of Commons.
