Schamber v. Schamber, 2011 ABQB 473

Court of Queen ’ s Bench of Alberta Citation: Schamber v. Schamber, 2011 ABQB 473 Date: 20110721 Docket: 4801 140174 Registry: Calgary Between: John Allen Schamber Plaintiff - and - Marian Claudette Schamber Defendant _______________________________________________________ Memorandum of Decision of the Honourable Mr. Justice A.B. Sulatycky _______________________________________________________ [1] At the conclusion of this trial I gave my decision on all issues in question except for that of parenting time for the father.

I reserved the decision on that issue because I considered that by interviewing the sole child of the marriage I might gain some insight into the child-parent relationships which was not available from the evidence. The child is a boy of seven years. [2] In the addition to questions of parenting and maintenance, the trial dealt with the mother’s desire to move with the child to the area of Regina, Saskatchewan.

A court appointed bilateral assessor recommended that the move not be allowed for a year in order to give the father an opportunity to develop better parenting skills and to strengthen his relationship with the child. The assessor was concerned that some of the mother’s approaches to the father’s parenting time amounted to “gatekeeping” and that her attitude created the possibility of parental alienation.

[3] I too had concerns about the mother’s attitude to the father. But the evidence was overwhelming that the child was thriving in every respect while in the primary care of the mother and I concluded that it was in the best interests of the child to allow the proposed move. [4] My interview with the child did not allay my concerns. It quickly became apparent that he was being provided inappropriately with details of the parental dispute. He came with more than a dozen pages of notes. Some were probably done at least partly on his own but many more were likely prompted by someone else.

He attributed any assistance to his counsellor. [5] I am also satisfied that certain incidents during the father’s parenting time have offended the child so the father is not entirely without fault. But it appears the mother does little to put the father in a positive light, rather seizing on and magnifying his deficits in the eyes of the child. [6] There were disagreements over parenting time while the parties were living in the same locality. The occasion for disputes may be limited by increased distance between the parties, but so will the father’s opportunities for parenting time.

At the same time the costs to the father of exercising his parenting time will increase. Since it was the mother’s choice to move and increase those costs I made a modest adjustment to the maintenance payable by the father.

The mother should be mindful that if the father makes expenditures to have parenting time with his son in accordance with the order I make and that parenting time is frustrated, curtailed or otherwise disrupted the father may be entitled to set off against maintenance payable by him his costs of providing his son, whose right it is, to parenting time with the father. [7] The parties have provided me with their respective proposals for the father’s parenting time. Except for a couple of caveats I will not order more paternal time than proposed by the mother nor less than proposed by the father.

The caveats are that during his parenting time, other than at the father’s residence, the father shall not infringe on that time by being in the company of a third party such as a partner or relative, nor shall the father reduce his attention to his son by spending undue time communicating by telephone, electronically or by other means with third parties. [8] The father’s parenting entitlements shall be as follows: 1 . To be provided with an address to which mail and parcels may at all times be forwarded to and received by the child; 2 .

To be provided with a telephone number at which the child will be available to take a telephone call from the father once per week between the hours of 6 and 6:30 p.m. on a day to be fixed by agreement between the parties failing which it shall be each and every Wednesday; 3 . To substitute, if he chooses, the weekly telephone call with a weekly video call via Skype (having first been provided with the appropriate electronic address as proposed by the mother); 4 .

To be informed by e-mail of significant information concerning the child’s health, education and well being and any of special events (which the father shall be entitled to attend) in the child’s life a soon as such events are scheduled ; 5 . To be with the child, upon giving the mother at least 48 hours notice, every second month during a weekend which is a long weekend in that particular month from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. on Saturday and from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Sunday with the child to be picked up and returned at all times at the McDonald’s restaurant on North Albert Street, Regina, Saskatchewan; 6 .

To one half of the Christmas holidays in each year. When the number of days of holidays is an odd number the father shall have the extra day, but all traveling time shall take place during the father’s time. In even numbered years the father’s time shall be the first half of the holidays and in odd numbered years it shall be the second half;

7 . To fourteen consecutive days starting on the Sunday of the last full week in July each and every year commencing in July 2012; 8 . To such other time as the parties may agree; 9 . To determine the means of travel for the child to spend time with his father, but travel by air will be subject to the criteria of the air carrier concerning minor children; 10 . To facilitate the child participating as a player in any soccer game scheduled during any of the father’s parenting time as soccer is the child’s preferred sport. Heard on the 9 th to the 13 th day of May, 2011.

Dated at the City of Calgary, Alberta this 21 st day of July, 2011. A.B. Sulatycky J.C.Q.B.A. Appearances: Cynthia Scheible for the Plaintiff Ruellen Forsyth-Nicolson for the Defendant