|barbara findlay Q.C.||
An Ontario judge got it right, holding a mother in contempt of court because denied access to a child's father based on...get this...the child's accidental exposure to what the mother believes is a polyamorous relationship among the child's paternal grandparents and a lesbian who lives with them. (The father currently has an application pending to remove the term restricting access to H from the order.)
When the parties separated in 2008, it was a term of the consent custody and access order that E's dad would not 'expose' her to the lesbian who lived with his parents. E's mother objected on religious an moral grounds to E having any contact with H.
This summer, E was accidentally in the same place as H twice: once when H arrived at a family barbecue and once when E's dad took her to the hospital to see her dying great grandmother and they ran into H. On both occasions H avoided E entirely, being aware of the court order.
Nevertheless, E's mother unilaterally suspended E's father's right to see E.
The court held the mother in contempt of court, and ordered makeup time for the access weekends the father had been wrongly denied.
It is very heartening to see courts treat situations involving queers and/or polyamorous families (whether the grandparents are in a polyamorous relationship has been alleged but not proven by the child's mother) without getting sidetracked, and without thinking it has anything to do with the best interests of the child.