Busch v Busch, 2015 ABQB 761

Court of Queen ’ s Bench of Alberta Citation: Busch v Busch, 2015 ABQB 761 Date: 20151201 Docket: 4803 167833 Registry: Edmonton Between: Rachelle Marie Busch Plaintiff(Respondent) - and - Markus Roland Busch Defendant(Applicant) _______________________________________________________ Memorandum of Decision of the Honourable Mr. Justice Sterling M. Sanderman _______________________________________________________ [ 1 ] On October 7 th , 2015, the Busches were involved in a Special Chambers application that dealt with a number of matters in dispute between them.

Prior to the hearing, counsel indicated that a number of contentious issues would be resolved by a consent order. The consent order dealt with Mr. Busch’s financial obligations in relation to the child of the marriage. He has been diligent in living up to his responsibilities in this regard and recognizes that it is ongoing. [ 2 ] The main issue before the court was the ongoing relationship that each parent would have with their daughter who celebrated her 6 th birthday in October of this year. Mr. Busch wanted the court to order a shared parenting arrangement. Ms. Busch resists this request vigorously.

She does so on the basis that Mr. Busch has had no substantial contact with his daughter since June of this year. She also views Mr. Busch’s new partner as a complicating factor in the life of their child. She certainly wants her daughter to have more contact with her father and encourages a healthy relationship. She has no concerns about Mr. Busch’s parenting ability but he has never

had to care for their daughter for extended periods of time. She would be much more comfortable working towards a shared parenting arrangement by giving Mr. Busch additional time and the opportunity to prove to her that he is capable of providing a healthy, nurturing environment for their child. [ 3 ] Much discussion took place between counsel and the court on October 7 th . I asked both counsel to provide me with the modified proposals of their clients in light of the discussions that took place. Both have done so. Neither has asked for a further oral hearing.

Consequently, I am prepared to make an order that will govern the parenting responsibilities of the parents. The Busches will have joint custody of their daughter but the primary residential care will be provided by Ms. Busch. [ 4 ] Ms. Busch views Mr. Busch’s recent dealings with their daughter as problematic. In addition to ignoring her for considerable periods of time, he has not availed himself of the opportunity to spend time with her when offered this option. Ms. Busch’s observations in relation to Mr. Busch’s childish and selfish behavior and the disappointment felt by her daughter when Mr.

Busch fails to show up are worth noting. [ 5 ] Mr. Busch’s present work

schedule allows him five (5) consecutive days off every 21 days. He works for 16 days and then has time off. The parties will utilize Our Family Wizard in order to communicate with one another. Mr. Busch will keep Ms. Busch informed in relation to the days he has off. He will have his daughter in his home for those five days. If he has to return to work for any reason during scheduled time off, he will return his daughter to her mother within 24 hours of being called back to work. In addition to this, Mr. Busch will have access to his daughter every second weekend from Friday at 6:00 pm until Sunday at 6:00 pm.

This regime will begin on Friday, December 4, 2015. If he has to work on any of these scheduled weekends, then the parties can agree to appropriate make-up time through Our Family Wizard. Any additional time that is agreed between the parties will also be given to Mr. Busch. [ 6 ] The exchanges of their daughter will take place at the day home that is presently being used by Ms. Busch. Failing that, they can take place at any public place agreed to between the parties.

This communication will take place through Our Family Wizard. [ 7 ] Before their daughter is placed with a third party because of the inability of either parent to care for her, the other parent will be given the right of first refusal. No placement with a third party will take place unless both parents are unable to provide care. [ 8 ] This year, the daughter will spend Christmas Eve with Mr. Busch; Christmas Day will be spent with Ms. Busch. Next year, that arrangement is to alternate. Mr. Busch will have his daughter every Father’s Day; Ms. Busch will have her every Mother’s Day.

Easter and Thanksgiving should be alternated between the parties. In 2016, Ms. Busch will have her daughter on Easter and Mr. Busch will have her for the Thanksgiving holiday. This will alternate in 2017. Mr. Busch will have two consecutive weeks with his daughter during the summer break from school in 2016. He will notify Ms. Busch which two weeks he wants by May 30, 2016. [ 9 ] I have declined to make orders in relation to the involvement of Mr. Busch’s new partner in relation to the exchanges of the child or her conduct in a general sense. This woman is now a part of Mr. Busch’s life.

The reality is that she will have contact with his daughter. It is anticipated that mature attitudes will prevail and that none of the adults will discuss the disputes between the parents with or in the presence of the child. Such behaviour would be counterproductive and viewed as troublesome by the court. It could call for sanctions. [ 10 ] This regime will allow Mr. Busch to prove that he is capable of embracing a shared parenting regime. This would be beneficial to his daughter. He has to show that he can fulfill all of his parenting responsibilities in relation to her. He cannot disappoint her.

He must contribute to creating an environment that is conducive to her overall development. This access regime will give him the opportunity to show Ms. Busch that he is capable of winning her trust in this regard. It is up to him. [ 11 ] No costs are awarded in this application. Heard on the 7 th day of October, 2015. Dated at the City of Edmonton, Alberta this 30 th day of November, 2015. Sterling M. Sanderman J.C.Q.B.A. Appearances:

Brook S. Mishna, Mishna Briere & Oehm LLP for the Applicant, Mr. Busch Greg R. Wool, Sharek & Co. for the Respondent, Ms. Busch