The applicant father sought an order for a Voice of the Child Report (VCR) for his two children (aged 8 and 6) to ascertain their views and preferences regarding a proposed expansion of his parenting time.
This motion was brought in the context of a review provision in a prior consent parenting order, which did not require a material change in circumstances.
The respondent mother objected to the VCR, primarily due to concerns about potential parental influence on the children's statements.
The court granted the father's motion, ordering the VCR to be conducted by a privately retained mental health professional following the Office of the Children's Lawyer methodology, and clarified that potential parental influence goes to the weight of the evidence, not its admissibility.
The court also declined to order the VCR professional to contact the children's therapist, upholding privacy principles and standard VCR methodology.
