Introduction

The court in Brady v. Fitzpatrick addressed the difficult issue of the role of addictions in family law. In this case, the mother had previously faced an alcohol addiction, which culminated in her being arrested twice for driving under the influence. The father unilaterally suspended the mother’s parenting time out of safety concerns for the children, and the mother brought a motion as a result. The court had to consider whether the circumstances warranted an interim parenting order, particularly given the concerns of the mother’s addiction.

Background

The Applicant mother and Respondent father shared two young children, ages 7 and 5 during the proceedings. Post-separation the parties initially shared parenting time of their two children.

However, during this time, the mother was arrested on two occasions for driving a motor vehicle while impaired by alcohol. In both instances, the children were in the vehicle but remained unharmed.

The mother hid the second incident from the father, who only learned of the accident after reading it in the news. The father then began withholding the children from their mother, citing safety concerns.

The mother had a serious battle with alcohol but stated she had taken steps towards recovery. As a result, the mother brought a motion seeking to increase her parenting time.

Analysis

In this case, the mother was seeking an interim parenting order. The court therefore had to consider the leading case law on this topic.

Historically, courts have stated that the purpose of an interim parenting order is to provide stability to children pending trial. Further, it has long been established that the status quo will be maintained on an interim motion for a parenting order unless there is evidence that the best interests of the children dictate otherwise.

The first step the court had to examine was therefore determining what the status quo in this case was. Status quo is said to be established by the parents’ practice or child’s routine prior to separation, or an arrangement made post separation.

The status quo is not changed by a parent who unilaterally imposes a parenting regime. In this case, the parties had been following a 50/50 shared parenting regime until the father began unilaterally withholding the children. Although the father was well-intentioned, his actions did not create a status quo of primary parenting.

The court then had to consider the best interests of the child. Notably, the children’s physical, emotional and psychological safety, security and well-being.

In analyzing the best interests, the court considered the facts of the case. In this case, the mother had been arrested twice, both times after separation, for driving under the influence of alcohol. In both instances, the children were in the car. The mother failed to disclose the second incident to father, as well as the fact that she had lost her license.

However, the mother also provided evidence that she had taken numerous steps to address her alcoholism. The mother took three breathalyzer tests a day, and the evidence indicated she had not been consuming alcohol since her second arrest. Further, the mother lived with her parents, who were willing supervise her parenting time with the children.

The court stated that the children’s safety was the paramount concern. However, given their young ages, the court also found it important that the children be nurtured and have a strong bond with both parents. As a result, the court ordered supervised parenting time with the mother, including overnight visits.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the court in Brady v. Fitzpatrick allowed the mother’s motion for increased parenting time. The father had unilaterally suspended the mother’s parenting time without an order from the court. Although the father’s actions were well-intentioned, the new parenting schedule could not create a status quo because he had withheld the children without the mother’s consent. The court was conscious of the mother’s addiction, as well as the safety of the children. However, given that the mother had taken steps to treat her addiction and was willing to have supervised parenting with the young children, the court awarded her the parenting time she sought.