Honsinger v. Honsinger, 2018 ONSC 3697
Court File No.: D25958/17
Date: 2018-06-14
Superior Court of Justice – Ontario
Re: Bryan Michael Honsinger, Applicant
And: Jennifer Amy Ellwood, Respondent
Before: Mr Justice Ramsay
Counsel: Yaroslav O. Diduch for the Applicant Paula Ferré for the Respondent R. Adams for the Children’s Lawyer
Heard: June 13, 2018 at Welland
Endorsement
[1] The parties were married in 2004 and separated in 2015. They have two children, a daughter age 10 and a son age 7. Under a separation agreement dated May 3, 2016 they share custody and parenting time equally on a two-week schedule, 2-2-3. In April 2017 the Applicant applied for a divorce and sole custody of the children. The Respondent now moves to suspend the Applicant’s parenting time under the separation agreement pending an investigation by FACS into inappropriate touching of the son by a member of the Applicant’s household. She also asks for orders for counselling, with which the Applicant now agrees. The Children’s Lawyer takes no position as the FACS investigation is not complete.
[2] The Applicant lives with a new partner. The partner has a seven-year-old son and a somewhat older daughter. On May 18, 2018 the parties’ seven-year-old son told the Respondent that his step-brother on five occasions had stuck his finger up his bum. The Respondent informed the Applicant on their communication app the next day. The Applicant then had the child leave a voice mail for the Respondent:
Child: Uhh, I was lying and uh, uhh, blame it on me. I didn’t do anything.
Applicant: You didn’t do anything?
Child: I lied and I did everything and that’s not true.
[3] On May 28, 2018 the parties attended the case conference and consented to an order that gives the Applicant and the Respondent two full weeks each of uninterrupted residence with the children over the summer holidays.
[4] The Respondent asked the child about the matter on May 29, 2018 and recorded the interview. It is reproduced verbatim in an exhibit to the Respondent’s affidavit. It seems odd to me that parents would react to a disclosure of this nature by getting a taped statement from a seven-year-old, but that is in effect what they both did. In any event the child has now given two contradictory accounts. There is something for FACS to investigate.
[5] The conduct disclosed is serious. The disclosure is not obviously false. Nor can it be held to be probably true at this point. A temporary order pending the outcome of the FACS investigation is called for, but I do not think that I have to go so far as to deny the Applicant contact with his children.
[6] There are a number of other issues raised in the materials. The children change residence too frequently. The Applicant overschedules them, which is a source of conflict. The Applicant’s new partner is listed as contact person with the school board, which is an easily avoidable source of conflict. The Applicant may or may not be encouraging his children to call their step-mother “mom.” If he is, it has to stop. The parties’ daughter is having a hard time adapting to the new family setup. It may be that this family has moved too quickly to equal parenting time and that a schedule that is centred on the children, rather than the parents, should be considered.
[7] For now, I think it sufficient to make the following temporary order:
a. The parenting schedule in the separation agreement shall resume.
b. The extended summer residence with both parents ordered by Donohue J. on consent on May 28, 2018 shall remain in place.
c. The parent with residence is not obliged to send the children to activities scheduled by the other parent.
d. Andrew shall not share a bedroom.
e. Only the parties shall be listed as contacts with the children’s schools.
f. Only the parties shall exercise discipline over the children.
g. The children shall not be encouraged to address anyone but the parties as “mom” or “dad.”
h. On consent, the children shall be registered for counselling with Dr Michelle Lohnes of Beamsville. The parties shall also register for counselling with Dr Lohnes, either individual or joint as she recommends.
[8] I do not know how it will all turn out in the end. Costs of the first return of this motion on June 8, 2018, which were reserved to me by Brown J., are fixed at $500 and reserved to the judge who makes the final order for custody and access. Costs of today are fixed at $1,500 and reserved to the judge who makes the final order for custody and access.
J.A. Ramsay J.
Date: 2018-06-14