COURT FILE NO.: FS-14-81793
DATE: 20210330
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
B E T W E E N:
James Scot Thomson
Shawn Philbert, for the Applicant
Applicant
- and -
Jill Fleming
Faryal Rashid (as agent), for the Respondent
Respondent
HEARD: March 29, 2021 (by Zoom)
RETURN OF MOTION FOR ACCESS (Eighth hearing)
Baltman J
[1] This is a longstanding and troubling file involving serious allegations of parental alienation. I have been overseeing the file for nearly a year, with the matter returning to me frequently for further directions to facilitate third party mediation and reconciliation.
[2] The parties married in June 2012 and separated in May 2014. Their daughter, Kaelin (born October 6, 2012) is now 8 years old.
[3] Scot was exercising regular access until late June 2019, when a physical altercation occurred (involving both parents and Kaelin) during an access transition. For a prolonged time thereafter, Kaelin – with Jill’s support – refused to see Scot.
[4] Since the parties first appeared before me (in April 2020) I have issued seven decisions on this matter[^1]. In my earlier decisions I determined that a) Jill had been wrongfully withholding access; and b) the parties needed a parenting mediator who would facilitate a resumption of access.
[5] After some delay, the parties retained Mr. Steven Cross as a mediator. He has been working with the family since early May 2020 in co-operation with Kaelin’s therapist, Ms. Erin Powley. Based on their reports, it is apparent that although Scot needs to improve his parenting technique, Jill has throughout been the major obstacle to the reunification of Kaelin with her father.
[6] After numerous unsuccessful efforts by Mr. Cross and Ms. Powley to educate and re-direct Jill, both professionals recommended that the parents engage in co-parenting sessions with Danny Firestone of PEACE Psychotherapy. Significantly, both parents recently asserted that they wished to immediately begin sessions with Mr. Firestone. With respect to Jill in particular, she sent that message both in her email of February 23, 2021 (“I would really like to sort out this issue so that we can start with Mr. Firestone”), and orally during the last hearing of February 25, 2021.
[7] It is apparent that Jill has not been honest with the court. Far from wanting to receive guidance from Mr. Firestone, she has most recently taken several actions to delay and obstruct his involvement.
[8] First, as noted in my last decision, she raised a completely bogus objection to how Mr. Firestone’s fees should be allocated between the parties.
[9] Second, she delayed providing Mr. Firestone with a properly executed intake and consent form.
[10] Third, since the parties’ first and only session with Mr. Firestone (on March 7), Jill has refused to attend any further sessions.
[11] Fourth, Jill defied Mr. Firestone’s recommendation for Kaelin to have a three hour visit with Scot on March 13. Jill attributes this to advice she allegedly received from Dr. Jonathan Beard, a child psychiatrist who assessed Kaelin at Mississauga Hospital on March 8. Jill asserts that Dr. Beard labelled Mr. Firestone’s recommendations a “punishment plan”. That is highly suspect, for three reasons:
a) Jill claims this advice was part of an “oral” report she received from Dr. Beard. Conveniently, no one was else was present to confirm that any such “advice” was given;
b) There is nothing remotely punitive in Mr. Firestone’s recommendations, which are contained in his email to both parents of March 8, 2021. He sets out reasonable expectations for Kaelin’s behaviour along with measured, appropriate consequences for her misbehaviour;
c) More tellingly, nowhere in his six-page report does Dr. Beard suggest that access visits with Mr. Firestone should not occur. On the contrary, in his final recommendations, he explicitly acknowledged that “the family is connected with social worker, Danny Firestone, for reunification and repair of relationships, particularly with the patient and her father.”
[12] Thus, far from contradicting Mr. Firestone’s advice, it is clear Dr. Beard is quite properly supporting Mr. Firestone’s role. I observe that Jill’s reliance on advice she allegedly received from Dr. Beard to contradict what many other professionals have told her is consistent with her longstanding pattern of involving a new professional whenever she does not like the advice of the existing ones.
[13] Fifth, Jill attempted to justify her decision to end access based on my “suspension” of access in my most recent decision of February 25, 2021. That is highly disingenuous. That Order stated that access was “suspended pending further recommendations from Mr. Firestone.” (emphasis added). Jill has ignored that important qualification because Mr. Firestone’s recommendation to resume access does not suit her.
[14] In sum, I find that once again Jill has set out to undermine and defeat a successful resumption of access. I have also concluded that further interim direction from the court on this issue will be fruitless. Any outstanding disputes must be resolved by way of a final order at trial. For efficiency sake, that trial shall include any and all outstanding issues in the litigation, including any financial disputes between the parties.
[15] To that end, should either party seek further direction from the court on any issue in this litigation, they shall arrange a Trial Management Conference with Justice Kurz, who provided the initial directions at the Settlement Conference. Moreover, given that court resources are limited, there shall be no further motions on this file, except with leave of Justice Kurz.
[16] I therefore order as follows:
Both parties shall continue to attend sessions with Mr. Firestone, as frequently as he recommends;
Both parties shall follow the co-parenting recommendations of Mr. Firestone. To be clear, Scot is entitled to access, but it shall take place as directed by Mr. Firestone;
Both parties shall immediately sign any releases necessary to permit Mr. Firestone to share with the court, the opposing party, and other professionals or health practitioners involved in this matter any information he deems relevant;
Except for a medical emergency, Jill shall not involve any additional mental health professionals beyond those currently involved in Kaelin’s treatment and Dr. Cheryl Fernandes (for whom Kaelin is on a wait list), without either Scot’s consent or a court order;
Except with leave of Justice Kurz, there shall be no further motions on this file;
Mr. Philbert shall immediately provide a copy of this endorsement to Mr. Firestone, Mr. Cross, Ms. Powley, Dr. Beard, and Dr. Fernandes.
Costs
[17] Once again, this motion was necessitated by Jill’s refusal to work toward reunification. She shall pay $7,500 in costs (inclusive of HST and disbursements), to be delivered to Mr. Philbert by no later than April 30, 2021. This is in addition to the $2,500 outstanding from the last Order.
Baltman J
Released: March 30, 2021
COURT FILE NO.: FS-14-81793
DATE: 20210330
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
B E T W E E N:
James Scot Thomson
Applicant
- and –
Jill Fleming
Respondent
RETURN OF MOTION FOR ACCESS (Eighth hearing)
Baltman J
Released: March 30, 2021
[^1]: Thomson v. Fleming, 2020 ONSC 2036 (April 3, 2020); Thomson v. Fleming, 2020 ONSC 3357 (May 29, 2020); Thomson v. Fleming, 2020 ONSC 4724 (August 5, 2020); Thomson v. Fleming, 2020 ONSC 6454 (October 22, 2020), Thomson v. Fleming, 2020 ONSC 7176 (November 20, 2020), Thomson v. Fleming, 2021 ONSC 702 (January 28, 2021), and Thomson v. Fleming, 2021 ONSC 1446.