Park v. Slevinsky, 2012 ABQB 390

Court of Queen ’ s Bench of Alberta Citation: Park v. Slevinsky, 2012 ABQB 390 Date: 20120613 Docket: FL03 23416 Registry: Edmonton Between: Sandra Park Applicant - and - Shawn Slevinsky Respondent _______________________________________________________ Memorandum of Decision of the Honourable Madam Justice J.B. Veit _______________________________________________________

Summary [ 1 ] In the absence of agreement between the parents who have joint custody of their children on a change of schools for the children, Ms. Park - with whom the children reside and who is moving from Edmonton to Sherwood Park - asks for authority to enroll the children in the Elk Island School District. [ 2 ] Mr. Slevinsky opposes any change of school on the grounds that such a change will prevent him from having the access time which he currently has arising out of his ability to walk the children from their schools to their residence and his ability to volunteer at the school of the youngest child.

[ 3 ] The application is granted: the children ’ s best interests do not require that they remain in their current schools. Rather, it is in their best interests to be allowed to attend schools in the area where they will reside so as to facilitate the development of a new social support network. Because of the age of the children, the relatively small impairment in the father ’ s actual parenting time can be compensated in other types of parenting. 1. Background [ 4 ] The parties ’ three children live with Ms. Park and attend schools in their school district in Edmonton.

The older child, who is 15, has a currently somewhat difficult relationship with his father; in the result, that child does not usually go to his father ’ s residence for week-end access. That child has decided that he will continue to attend high school in Edmonton once he has moved to Sherwood Park; he will have a 15 minute bus ride from his new residence to the school of his choice which is apparently located almost on the border between Edmonton and Sherwood Park. [ 5 ] The next oldest child attends a junior high school in Edmonton.

She is not involved in any extra-curricular activities at the school. [ 6 ] The youngest child attends grade school in Edmonton. She is not involved in any extra-curricular activities at the school. During the current school year, Mr. Slevinsky has volunteered for 9 field trips at her school. [ 7 ] The younger children, on whom this application focusses, are doing very well in school; neither participates in, nor requires, any special education program. [ 8 ] Mr.

Slevinsky has alternate week-end access; however, because he works only on week-ends - from early Friday morning until late Sunday evening - his actual parenting time is very limited. However, Mr. Slevinsky does typically walk the two younger children from their schools to their current residence, which is close to his residence. Mr. Slevinsky has worked in sales, but for the last approximately six months has been employed by a relative in a manufacturing job. Mr. Slevinsky has just obtained a certificate in power engineering and may look for employment in that field. 2.

Is it in the children ’ s best interests to attend schools in their new neighbourhood? [ 9 ] The best interests of the children is, of course, at the core of all parenting decisions, including decisions about education. [ 10 ] There is no academic or extra-curricular reason why the children could not attend a school close to their new residence in Sherwood Park rather than their current school in Edmonton.

The schools in the Elk Island district undoubtedly have the same capacity to nurture the potential of these bright young children as do schools in the Edmonton school district. [ 11 ] Attending schools in the neighbourhood where they live, with children who reside in the same neighbourhood, would provide the children with social and emotional opportunities. Maintaining relatively close links between school and community would allow the children to develop social support systems amongst their schoolmates. [ 12 ] The only negative effect of a change of schools relates to Mr.

Slevinsky ’ s actual parenting time with his two younger children; that time will, at least as things stand as of this application, be minimally decreased since he will no longer be able to walk his children from their schools to their residence and it will no longer be easy for him to volunteer at the youngest child ’ s school. This, albeit very limited, parenting opportunity is cherished by Mr. Slevinsky because, at the moment, he does not have very much actual parenting time on his alternate week-end access periods because of his week-end employment

schedule and the fact that he was taking his certificate courses in the evenings.

[ 13 ] It is unfortunate that a move to Elk Island schools would negate a small parenting opportunity for Mr. Slevinsky. However, given the age of the children, the youngest being currently in Grade 4 and the next youngest being currently in Grade 7, real and effective ongoing communication between the children and their father will be possible even if it is not in person. Moreover, it is possible that Mr.

Slevinsky ’ s employment situation will change with his recent acquisition of a trades training certificate which will presumably allow him employment opportunities that will enhance the time he will have for in-person parenting of his children. The enrollment of the children in schools for the 2012-2013 academic year cannot, however, wait until Mr. Slevinsky ’ s potential new employment situation is known. [ 14 ] Overall, the children ’ s best interests is to attend schools in Sherwood Park.

The potentially short term negative effect of the loss of some in-person time with their father can be compensated in other ways. Therefore, the mother ’ s application to enroll the children for the coming school year in Sherwood Park schools is allowed. Heard on the 31 st day of May and the 7 th day of June, 2012. Dated at the City of Edmonton, Alberta this 12 th day of June, 2012. J.B. Veit J.C.Q.B.A. Appearances: Ms. Park, on her own behalf Mr. Slevinsky, on his own behalf