I
was under the impression that holding a person for ransom was against the law
in Canada. Apparently this does not apply to co-parenting couples who live
apart. This applies even when the Dad is hyper-vigilant about paying support
for the child’s cost to thrive, takes an interest in the child’s school, and
wants to be an involved parent. Mom can take her child and move to another province without so much as a bat of an eye, and once there move every few months without ever once informing her husband where they are living, but still expect her husband to keep up payments for the child’s “upkeep” which amount to far more than if the child were paying room and board.
While “Gypsy Rose Mom” is flitting about, uprooting her child from a static, if not squalor existence every few months, Dad can have a stable management position, with a home where the child can have her own room (rather than sleeping with Mom), the positive influence of a two-parent household with a step-sibling in residence, but still be held to a higher standard of being responsible for travelling thousands of kilometers to see his child.
When work is necessary to assist to cover the “Child Maintenance Costs”, Dad is accused of making choices to work, rather than spend hundreds of dollars to see his child. Keep in mind; it was a Welfare Recipient Mom who moved thousands of kilometers away to help guarantee that her husband would have difficulty seeing his child.
Keeping the child as a subject of ransom against her husband is contradictory to her position that she refuses to give her husband a divorce, therefore prefers to keep a relationship legally alive although emotionally and physically, the relationship has been dead for many, many years.
The only choice the husband has to pay an additional ransom of several thousand dollars through the Supreme Court of Canada to force the divorce as a contested process.
