S.T.M v. C.G.H., 2023 BCPC 110

Citation: S.T.M v. C.G.H. 2023 BCPC 110 Date: 20230518 File No: [Omitted for Publication] Registry: Prince George IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA IN THE MATTER OF THE FAMILY LAW ACT , S.B.C. 2011 c. 25 BETWEEN: S.T.M. APPLICANT AND: C.G.H. RESPONDENT REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURABLE JUDGE M.J. BRECKNELL Counsel for the Applicant: G. Whidden Counsel for the Respondent: F. MacLean and A. Sadavoska Counsel for B.H. G. Petrisor, K.C. Place of Hearing: Prince George , B.C. Dates of Hearing: April 7 - 9, August 16 - 20, November 1 - 5, 8 - 10, 12, 2021, March 23, April 27, June 16, August 25, November 16 and 23, Dec. 15, 2022 January 20, 2023 Date of Judgment: May 18, 2023

INTRODUCTION [ 1 ] B. was born on [omitted for publication]. This decision will refer to her as B. to preserve her privacy. Her parents are S.T.M. and C.G.H. (jointly the Parties). S.T.M. is a [omitted for publication]. C.G.H. is an [omitted for publication] who owns and operates a consulting [omitted for publication] firm, [omitted for publication]. [ 2 ] The Parties have long been unable to agree on how they should allocate their parental responsibilities and parenting time with B. Those disagreements resulted in this litigation.

It has been protracted, acrimonious and expensive for the Parties, both emotionally and financially. It has been wearing in stressful on them, their families, and their friends. Most importantly, it has had adverse impacts on B. [ 3 ] B. has several complex, not fully addressed mental health and behavioural issues. Diagnoses of B.’s many challenges over the years include separation anxiety disorder (SAD), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). [ 4 ] The experts who have assessed or treated B. now agree that she also has Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD).

That term is used here to describe the condition. ASD is an incurable neurodevelopmental disorder but therapies can help a person better understand their circumstances and develop strategies to assist them in their daily life. [ 5 ] Over the years, several health care professionals were engaged to ascertain and implement strategies that would benefit B. with her multiple diagnoses. The Parties have been unable to agree on how the various experts’ reports and strategies should be implemented in B.’s best interests and what role B. should have in that implementation.

ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED [ 6 ] I must resolve the following issues:

a) The appropriate parenting arrangements for B., including parenting time and parental responsibilities;

b) Whether the P arties will retain additional professionals to assist B, and if so, what those professionals will address;

c) Whether S.T.M. has caused parental alienation between B. and C.G.H.;

d) Whether S.T.M. has wrongfully withheld B. from C.G.H. during his past parenting time; and

e) A determination of retroactive and prospective child support, including special and extraordinary expenses. APPROACH TO SUMMARIZING THE EVIDENCE [ 7 ] In light of the voluminous evidence presented orally, by affidavits, in electronic communications, by video, and through various experts’ reports it is important for the Parties and counsel to have an understanding of my approach in reviewing and summarizing the evidence. It is a similar approach to that adopted in R. v. Connell , 2017 BCPC 123 , by the Honourable Judge T.

Woods where he said at paragraphs 5 and 6: [5] … I will candidly acknowledge that in these Reasons for Judgment I have not made reference to all of the testimony given by the witnesses who were called, or to all of the documentary evidence that was received and marked. I have, rather, referred to evidence that I consider necessary to mention in connection with my factual findings and the legal conclusions that flow from them. In places I have made mention of evidence that I have been unable to accept, and of the reasons why I have been unable to accept it.

If evidence is not mentioned in this decision, both Crown and defence may take comfort that the omission is not the result of my not having taken note of it. I have read all of the transcripts from end to end. I have done the same with all of the documentary exhibits. If witness testimony or documentary evidence do not come up for specific mention in these reasons that is because: (

a) The evidence was not relevant; (

b) The evidence is to the same effect as other evidence of which mention has been made; or (

c) The evidence was tendered in support of alleged facts I have not found and arguments that I have not accepted, having regard to the facts that I have found and the arguments that are supported by those facts. [6] That it is an acceptable practice for a trial judge to confine him or herself, in Reasons for Judgment, to a compressed and somewhat selective canvassing of the evidence heard at trial is well established on the authorities.

The law is clear that where there is substantial support in the record for a trial judge's findings and the inferences drawn from them, the trial judge does not make a reversible error by failing to refer to every item of evidence that was adduced: [Citations omitted] [ 8 ] The evidence in this decision is summarized and condensed; sometimes without specific reference to whose evidence it was or from which document it emanated. Where evidence was presented in an affidavit and repeated at trial or described in several places in submissions to support different findings it will be referred to only once.

PARENTING ARRANGEMENTS LIVING SITUATIONS [ 9 ] Since the Parties’ separation, B. has lived primarily with S.T.M. with C.G.H. having shorter periods of parenting time. He contested this parenting time arrangement both before and after the litigation started.

[ 10 ] S.T.M. started a relationship with D.H. in August 2016. They started living together in January 2017 but did not commence conjugal relations until August 2017. D.H.’s two sons, who are slightly younger than B, moved into the home around April 2018 and resided there on a week on week off schedule. S.T.M. and D.H. separated and he and his children left her home in the summer of 2022. [ 11 ] C.G.H. started a relationship with T.C. in 2018.

T.C. has no children. [ 12 ] There are a number of pets and other animals at both homes but the most important one to B. is her dog, [omitted for publication] , who regularly accompanies her as she travels back and forth between the homes. B. has trained [omitted for publication] to be a therapy dog and takes [omitted for publication] to senior residences. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE [ 13 ] The documentary evidence was extensive and varied and included:

a) Exhibit 1A - Book of Documents of S.T.M. - 23 tabs and 119 pages of electronic communication between the Parties and with third parties; correspondence to and from various third parties, correspondence to and from B.’s various health care providers, excerpts from B.’s diary, correspondence from the College of Psychologists of British Columbia (the College) and documents regarding special and extraordinary expenses for B.;

b) Exhibit 1B – Book of Affidavits - 13 tabs and 533 pages of filed affidavits and Financial Statements of the Parties;

c) Exhibit 1C – Book of Extraordinary Expenses - 3 tabs and 117 pages of lists of expenses and receipts prepared by S.T.M.;

d) Exhibits 1D, E and F - Book of Guardianship and Parenting Arrangements (in three volumes) - 73 tabs and 3000 pages of electronic communication between the Parties and with third parties, photographs of the Parties and others with B., correspondence to and from various government agencies and RCMP file notes;

e) Exhibit 1G – Book of Financials of C.G.H. - 43 tabs and 274 pages of Financial Statements, tax returns, Notices of Assessments and Reassessments, Financial Statements for [omitted for publication], vehicle purchase documents, documents regarding real estate transactions and renovations by [omitted for publication] and [omitted for publication] and miscellaneous bank records;

f) Exhibit 1H - Book of Financials of S.T.M. - 6 tabs and 55 pages of Financial Statements, tax returns, Notices of Assessments and Reassessments;

g) Exhibit 1I – Book of Additional Documents –23 tabs and 225 pages of electronic communication between the Parties and with third parties, electronic communication between S.T.M. and B., artwork by B., video recordings and charts of C.G.H.’s missed parenting time;

h) Exhibit 1J – Book of Experts - 51 tabs and 279 pages of electronic communication between the Parties and with various experts including Dr. Holly Ambrose (Dr. Ambrose), Dr. Elizabeth Rocha (Dr. Rocha), Dr. Andrea Welder (Dr. Welder), Dr. Nicole Aube (Dr. Aube); the curriculum vitae for Dr. Ambrose, Dr. Aube, Dr Susan Gamache (Dr. Gamache) and Ms. Katherine Paxton (Ms. Paxton), correspondence to and from various third parties, reports prepared by various experts, correspondence between the Parties’ counsel, correspondence regarding the complaint about Dr. Aube to the College;

i) Exhibit 1K – Book of Orders - 16 tabs and 76 pages of Court Orders, Reasons for Judgment, various pleadings, draft Memorandum of Understanding and Written Agreement and the Separation Agreement (the Agreement) between the Parties;

j) Exhibit 1L - Book of Documents of Dr. Aube - 6 tabs and 140 pages of various documents pertaining to Dr. Aube’s involvement in the process of gathering information and the preparation of the

Section 211 Report (The Report);

k) Exhibit 1M – Book of Documents of Dr. Gamache - 4 tabs and 99 pages of various documents pertaining to Dr. Gamache’s evidence including Family Systems Therapy (FST);

l) Exhibit 2 – Final Report of the College regarding S.T.M.’s complaint about Dr. Aube - 26 pages;

m) Exhibit 3 – Documents provided to Dr. Aube –204 pages;

n) Affidavits filed in March and April 2022 regarding S.T.M.’s family situation – 25 pages;

o) Exhibit 4 – Book of affidavits filed in August, November and December 2022 regarding S.T.M.'s family situation, B.'s views about parenting time and B.'s counselling status - 302 pages;

p) Exhibit 5 – Book of transcripts including the April 27, 2022 hearing – 79 pages;

q) A

summary of B.'s views concerning parenting time –nine pages; and

r) Affidavits with further financial disclosure filed in February 2023 - 110 pages. [ 14 ] There were 17 days of oral evidence, in person and by video, from 17 witnesses. There were eight subsequent appearances, for oral submissions and new evidence involving three additional witnesses. PRE LITIGATION FAMILY HISTORY [ 15 ] S.T.M. was born on [omitted for publication] and is now [omitted for publication] . C.G.H. was born on [omitted for publication] and is now [omitted for publication] .

[ 16 ] S.T.M. studied criminology at colleges in British Columbia and Ontario but did not complete her degree because she joined the [omitted for publication] . After her training, she transferred to [omitted for publication] where she met C.G.H. [ 17 ] C.G.H. received a psychology degree from University British Columbia in [omitted for publication] . He taught English at schools in Korea and in Vancouver for four years.

For approximately four years, he worked as a youth and childcare counsellor on a team with other professionals assisting youth who came from a troubled background, broken homes or had some form of developmental disability. He moved to [omitted for publication] to start a career as a [omitted for publication] with the [omitted for publication] . [ 18 ] The Parties began a spousal relationship in the summer of 2006 and lived in a home owned by S.T.M. near [omitted for publication] .

In [omitted for publication] , S.T.M. became pregnant with B. she had a difficult pregnancy with many health issues including many planned and unexpected medical appointments, some brief hospital stays and other medical interventions. She assumed modified duties with the [omitted for publication] but received her regular salary. [ 19 ] B. was slightly under weight at birth. She cried a lot in her early infancy and got very little sleep. She learned to walk at a young age.

S.T.M. remained at home for one year while C.G.H. continued his employment but on an altered schedule. [ 20 ] The Parties disagree on the level of C.G.H.’s assistance to S.T.M. during the pregnancy and his assumption of household duties during that time and after B.’s birth while S.T.M. was on parental leave. C.G.H. expressed concern about S.T.M. breastfeeding B. until she was almost two years old, claiming that activity interfered with his time with B, it was not natural and resulted in enmeshment between S.T.M. and B. C.G.H. acknowledged to Dr.

Aube that he was “at best a part time dad” during that period. [ 21 ] He also disagreed with S.T.M. frequently co-sleeping with B. until she was about nine years old because he did not think it was healthy. He said that if B. cried or fussed at night S.T.M. would become anxious and would immediately go to her bedroom, often for the whole night. [ 22 ] Around the time of B.’s birth C.G.H. became a [omitted for publication] for northern British Columbia. The Parties disagree about how many days C.G.H. was away from home in that position.

S.T.M. maintained he was frequently away throughout the province, often for extended periods, while C.G.H. stated such absences were rare, to close by communities and never exceeded two nights but he acknowledged to Dr. Aube that he was very busy with that position and had to travel “sometimes up to three days a week around the province”. [ 23 ] C.G.H. said that he resigned from that position after one year so he could spend more time at home. S.T.M. acknowledged that C.G.H. resigned but that did not result in him spending more time with her and B.

C.G.H. was also away from home in blocks of time for several months while working as a first-aid attendant at a mine. [ 24 ] S.T.M. said that in B.’s early infancy, the two of them made several extended visits to her parents’ home near [omitted for publication] , and her sister’s home in Prince George so her family could assist with B.’s care. In addition, S.T.M.’s parents were frequent visitors in [omitted for publication] and they assisted with B.’s care.

C.G.H. discounted the frequency, lengths and purpose of these visits. [ 25 ] C.G.H.’s parents lived in a community close to [omitted for publication] but S.T.M. described them as having only infrequent and limited contact with B. in her early infancy. There was a tentative arrangement that C.G.H.’s parents would provide childcare for B. when S.T.M. returned to work but on the eve of that happening, the arrangement fell through.

S.T.M. said it was because C.G.H.’s parents decided they did not have the energy, while C.G.H. maintained that a dispute arose between his parents and S.T.M.’s parents causing her to terminate the arrangement. [ 26 ] S.T.M. secured childcare for B. with the spouse of one of her co-workers but that required a daily total commute of 80 kilometres to get her there. S.T.M. said that she did all the driving but C.G.H. disagreed with that assertion saying that he did some of the driving.

That arrangement continued until S.T.M. moved from [omitted for publication] . [ 27 ] When she first returned to work, S.T.M. was on general duty but she transferred to [omitted for publication], so she would not have to work night shifts. She said that whenever she was at work, B. would be in childcare even when C.G.H. was not working and at home. S.T.M. said that C.G.H. did not fully participate in household chores and other duties in B.'s younger years but that he did participate on occasion and occasionally took B. to the doctor or dentist.

C.G.H. disputed that contention maintaining he was equally involved in all aspects of parenting verified by numerous photographs in evidence. [ 28 ] C.G.H. wanted to move from [omitted for publication] . The Parties discussed C.G.H.'s career plans and he decided to attend university. In [omitted for publication] , C.G.H. moved to Prince George to attend the University of Northern British Columbia (UNBC). His original intention was to pursue medicine studies but he changed to study [omitted for publication] .

During his first term, C.G.H. lived in Prince George during the week and returned to [omitted for publication] on some weekends. [ 29 ] In [omitted for publication] , S.T.M. obtained a compassionate transfer to Prince George that also provided additional career opportunities for her. When S.T.M. was working, B. attended UNBC's day care program and she had the assistance of her sister. C.G.H. said he often dropped B. off at day care before going to class and picked her up at the end of the day if B. was not in an activity, in which case her aunt or another caregiver would pick her up.

S.T.M. contended that C.G.H.’s participation in transporting B. to day care was sporadic. [ 30 ] S.T.M. said that even if he had a day off, C.G.H. would take B. to day care and on many weekends where S.T.M. was working and C.G.H. was at home he would take B. to her aunt’s so he could focus on his studies. C.G.H. disputed that claim. [ 31 ] When B. was approximately three years old and attending day care, she started showing signs of anxiety.

At the time, both S.T.M. and, to a lesser extent, C.G.H. viewed B’s behaviours as personality “quirks.” [ 32 ] S.T.M. said that B. had a very upsetting reaction to fire alarms that required additional work by her and the day care to lessen

B.’s anxieties. C.G.H. did not assist in this area. B.’s anxieties around fire alarms persisted into her later childhood. She expressed to S.T.M. fear of being burned in a fire and would cry. [ 33 ] C.G.H. did not agree that B. had problems with fire alarms. He said he was a [omitted for publication] and S.T.M. is a [omitted for publication] and B. was exposed to sirens.

He did not agree that B. was suffering anxiety as a result of the fire alarms at the day care or subsequently. [ 34 ] In [omitted for publication] , S.T.M. went to Ottawa for a two-month [omitted for publication] course to qualify as a [omitted for publication].

During that time, S.T.M. said B. was cared for by C.G.H. and her sister, while C.G.H. said he was practically B’s only caregiver. [ 35 ] S.T.M. said that as an [omitted for publication] , she would occasionally be called out at night and on weekends and whenever that occurred she would have her sister or third party care for B. because C.G.H. was working hard on his university studies. [ 36 ] C.G.H. said that while S.T.M. was taking her [omitted for publication] training he was able to almost completely toilet train B. but when S.T.M. returned she continued to wipe B.'s bottom and that behaviour continued until B. was nine years old even though he objected to it.

He said that B. and S.T.M. had a code so S.T.M. would know when B. wanted assistance in the bathroom. After the separation when B. was at his home he insisted that she attend to her own personal hygiene and that upset her. [ 37 ] S.T.M. agreed that B. was potty trained very easily but insisted that she have a clean bottom. However, she would sometimes soil herself while at day care. B. disclosed she did not like using the bathroom there because there were no doors on the stalls. That issue was resolved through the combined efforts of S.T.M. and the day care without any assistance from C.G.H.

S.T.M. subsequently attributed B.’s continuing hygiene issues to her later diagnosed ASD. [ 38 ] Starting in the summer of [omitted for publication] , C.G.H.’s [omitted for publication] education involved considerable fieldwork that took him away from Prince George, often for many days at a time. His absences required further adjustments to B.’s care regime involving an additional third party who worked at the day care. This summer work and childcare arrangement continued until the end of the summer of 2013. [ 39 ] In July 2012, S.T.M. was pregnant but miscarried.

C.G.H. was in the field and returned to be with S.T.M. He only remained a short time before returning to work. S.T.M. said that C.G.H.'s lack of support greatly distressed her and the relationship began to founder. [ 40 ] In the summer of 2013, C.G.H. found out that S.T.M. was having an affair. He left his job but continued his studies. The Parties started marriage counselling. C.G.H. said that he also stopped drinking wine because it seemed to upset S.T.M. even though he was not a heavy consumer. S.T.M. was not a drinker.

After a few sessions, S.T.M. stopped attending the marriage counselling. [ 41 ] In September [omitted for publication], B. began Kindergarten. The Parties participated in getting B. to school and a caregiver was hired to pick her up after school, care for her and take her to arranged activities. S.T.M. said B. was very anxious about starting Kindergarten. She seemed to have difficulty adapting to change and it required considerable effort on S.T.M. and the teacher’s part to help B. overcome those fears. [ 42 ] That winter B. also expressed a fear of getting her tongue stuck on a metal pole at school.

S.T.M. worked with B. to overcome those fears. She said that both she and C.G.H. continued to attribute that behaviour to B.’s personality quirks. C.G.H. attributed S.T.M.’s many visits to the Kindergarten to her insistence in wiping B.’s bottom. He did not recall S.T.M. raising any major concerns about B.’s anxieties at that time. [ 43 ] S.T.M. said that although the diagnoses of B’s. mental health challenges were not until 2018, she noticed as early as 2011 that B. exhibited a number of unusual behaviours. She spoke to C.G.H. about them but he described them as quirks or odd behaviours.

When they became more pronounced, C.G.H. dismissed them and criticized her for raising them, telling her that she did not know what she was talking about and that his experience as a paramedic and working with youth gave him better insight to the situation. [ 44 ] C.G.H. denied belittling S.T.M., calling her dumb or stupid, that her concerns had no merit or saying that she was making things up.

He also did not tell her that he knew better because he knew better as a [omitted for publication], had a degree in psychology or that he had worked as a child counsellor. [ 45 ] The Parties separated in early summer 2014 when C.G.H. found out that S.T.M. was continuing her affair. C.G.H. moved out of the home immediately. He first went to [omitted for publication] to advise S.T.M.'s parents about the situation where he had a verbal confrontation with her father, R.M.

He then went to stay with friends for a short period. [ 46 ] C.G.H. sought counselling assistance and obtained a prescription from his doctor to address his mental health that he took for approximately three months. He said he obtained permission from UNBC to delay his Master's thesis so he could find work and a place to live. [ 47 ] C.G.H. continued his fieldwork and continued to be away for extended periods. He rented a basement room in a home where several other men lived.

He said he did not feel it was an appropriate place to have overnight parenting time with B. but that S.T.M. brought her over to visit with him when he was home on weekends.

S.T.M. said that C.G.H.’s parenting time with B. during that time was limited to occasional weekends because he was often absent for work until November 2015 when he moved into his first home in a rural area outside of Prince George. [ 48 ] S.T.M. said both prior to and in the immediate months following their separation she was the parent primarily responsible for B.’s day-to-day care because C.G.H. was often away from home for school or for work or pursuing his studies to complete his education. The sporadic nature of C.G.H.’s parenting time with B. was very troubling to B.

Due to her mental health challenges consistency and routine in scheduling was, and remains, very important to her health and well-being.

SEPARATION AGREEMENT [ 49 ] In November 2014, the Parties entered into the Agreement drafted by C.G.H. after he consulted with the Internet and some lawyers by phone. It dealt with all aspects of the dissolution of the spousal relationship. The terms of B.’s continuing care and child support included: PARENTING ARRANGEMENT 7. The Parties agree that joint legal guardianship is in the best interest of the child. The Parties agree that both parents are fit and proper persons to have joint responsibility for the care of the dependent child. 8. The Parties agree that the child will reside with both parents. 9.

The Parties also agree that the Parties will have the following parenting time with the Child: 50/50 share with specific arrangements for weekdays, holidays, vacations and weekends to be determined and agreed upon by both Parties at a later date. CHILD SUPPORT 10. Neither parent will pay child support unless agreed to, and amended in a subsequent separation agreement. 11. The Parties will pay the cost of childcare and special and extraordinary expenses generally 50/50 ratio but in proportion to their respective incomes.

For example, if one parent earns 30% more than the other than that parent will pay 30% more of the childcare expenses. 12. The Parties agree that each will provide the other a copy of their income tax returns and any notices of assessment and reassessment issue, on an annual basis, until the child reaches the age of 19 years. [ 50 ] S.T.M. said that C.G.H. insisted the Agreement have equal parenting time because he did not want to pay any child support although he acknowledged to her that he would not be able to care for B. on an equal basis because of his fieldwork.

She did not do any research nor get any legal advice prior to signing the Agreement and accepted what C.G.H. said about equal parenting time. She agreed to those terms because C.G.H. told her that he would smear her name with her family, friends and co-workers regarding her affair and because she believed that equal parenting would be in B.’s best interests. [ 51 ] C.G.H. said he did not threaten or coerce S.T.M. in any way to sign the Agreement and that her friends and family already knew about the affair.

He knew he would be absent a great deal in the summer months but that he would have more time with B. in the winter months. [ 52 ] C.G.H. paid no regular monthly child support until the litigation commenced but each Party contributed to B.'s expenses as described in the Agreement. EARLY POST SEPARATION PARENTING [ 53 ] Starting in September 2014 and continuing until November 2017, S.T.M. had a boarder who helped care for B. and ensure she got to school on time when S.T.M. was working.

After school, the caregiver picked B. up and took her to her activities. [ 54 ] S.T.M. said that in the summers of 2014 and 2015, C.G.H. was very busy with his field work and in the winter months he worked hard on completing his Master’s thesis so did not have a lot of time for B. [ 55 ] S.T.M. said that C.G.H.'s infrequent, sporadic and often unplanned parenting time with B. had a detrimental effect on B. and she displayed anger, frustration and anxiety when presented with surprise or unplanned events.

She tried to explain those concerns and made suggestions to assist B. to C.G.H. but he ignored her. [ 56 ] C.G.H. maintained that S.T.M. was very cooperative in ensuring he had time with B. when he was available and that he and B. would do things together including rock climbing, bicycle riding, riding ATVs, going swimming and activities at places including the museum. S.T.M. said she encouraged C.G.H. to take B. rock climbing because she did not enjoy it. For a time C.G.H.’s brother Tom lived with him.

He was a ski instructor who taught B. to ski, an activity she enjoys. [ 57 ] S.T.M. said that she kept C.G.H. informed of B.’s activities by sending photographs of her swimming, playing soccer and the like. C.G.H. insisted on having B. for Christmas 2015 and that was arranged. [ 58 ] C.G.H. said that on many weekends, B. would come to his home with S.T.M. who would remain overnight and they enjoyed conjugal relations. He said that pattern continued well into 2016. He was wary of her intentions given her previous affair but he believed they might be working towards reconciliation.

He was unaware that S.T.M. had started a relationship with D.H. [ 59 ] C.G.H. told S.T.M. that he wanted to have more time with B. without her being present. She agreed, but continued to come to his home unannounced during his parenting time. Later S.T.M. began to often send B. to his home with a friend or cousin. He concluded that S.T.M.’s actions were meant to undermine his regular requests for equal parenting time. [ 60 ] C.G.H. said that B. started to become reluctant to spend time with him without S.T.M. being present.

On many occasions, B. confided in him that she missed S.T.M. and was worried that S.T.M. would “die of a broken heart.” [ 61 ] C.G.H. said that around the same time S.T.M. advised him that it was B.’s choice not to increase parenting time with him and that she intended to respect B.’s wishes over his objections that B. should not be given a choice in the matter and it should be resolved between the Parties.

[ 62 ] S.T.M. said that at that time she never told B. that she had any choice about spending time with C.G.H. and she always encouraged B. to spend time with him when he requested it. [ 63 ] In January 2016, she proposed to C.G.H. a scheduled care regime to lessen B.’s anxieties about surprises and lack of advance knowledge of her routine but C.G.H. ignored her proposal.

Throughout 2016, B.’s adverse behaviours surrounding her time with C.G.H. became even more pronounced and worrisome. [ 64 ] S.T.M. said she corresponded regularly with C.G.H. describing her observations and concerns about B. but he either ignored her or said she was making things up. C.G.H. said that both he and S.T.M. recognized that B. was showing signs of anxiety that needed to be addressed. The Chicken Coop Incident [ 65 ] In June 2016, B.’s behaviours and her reluctance to spend time with C.G.H. became even more pronounced.

B. told S.T.M. that on one occasion at C.G.H.'s she had left the gate to the chicken coop open. When he discovered that, C.G.H. told her that if she did that again he would cut off the chickens’ heads in front of her. [ 66 ] Soon after the incident, S.T.M. reported to C.G.H. that B. was wetting the bed and showing signs of great anxiety. S.T.M. said she contacted C.G.H. to find out what happened, suggested a meeting to discuss that and other issues, that they implement a

schedule for B.’s time with him and that C.G.H. phone B. on a regular schedule. She got no reply to that email. [ 67 ] C.G.H. said that he explained to B. the importance of making sure to close the gate to chicken coop to prevent his guardian dogs from attacking the chickens. B. appeared to understand but not long after she left the gate open and the dogs almost got to the chickens. He was very upset and shouted at B. [ 68 ] He did not say he would kill the chickens in front of her or anything like that. He explained that if the dog got into the chicken coop they would all be dead.

After the incident, S.T.M. told him that B. was reluctant to come to his home on the weekends when he returned from his fieldwork. He believed his reaction to the incident may have initiated or exacerbated some of B.'s anxieties and he feels badly about that. [ 69 ] S.T.M. said that the incident and C.G.H.’s response, as B. interpreted it, remains a continued source of anxiety and concern for B. Dr.

Ambrose confirmed that B. still displays anxiety when talking about the incident. [ 70 ] C.G.H. said that the incident occurred at the same time S.T.M. was starting her relationship with D.H. which B. and S.T.M. never told him about and that deception increased B.’s anxieties. SUMMER 2016 [ 71 ] S.T.M. said that in the summer months of 2016 and 2017, C.G.H. was often away for up to 10 days at a time doing [omitted for publication] fieldwork. [ 72 ] In the summer of 2016, S.T.M. purchased a new home and soon after suggested to C.G.H. that they exchange B. at a neutral location.

C.G.H. said that he had only been to S.T.M.'s home on a few occasions and he did not know why she was reluctant to have him come there but that she was very evasive when he would ask questions about what was going on in her home. She also asked him to stop asking any questions of B. about what went on in her home even though he was not doing anything more than making general inquiries about what was going on in B.’s life.

He said that B. became even more reluctant to come to his home without confirming everything with S.T.M. [ 73 ] S.T.M. said in the fall of 2016, a plan was implemented with B. spending one weekend night and Tuesday after school at C.G.H.’s and that prior to that happening both she and C.G.H. would set out for B. what was planned for that time to make her more comfortable.

For a while, B. was accepted that approach and some of her worrisome behaviours diminished. [ 74 ] C.G.H. said that in the fall of 2016, he purchased an iPad for B. and after that B. began to contact S.T.M. more and more often when she was with him. At first he did not discourage that behaviour but he became more concerned when B.’s contacting S.T.M. after almost everything she did at his home became routine. [ 75 ] S.T.M. said that B. has always had difficulty sleeping but that became worse in the fall of 2016 when she began to express fear that because she could not sleep, she would die.

In addition, B. complained of symptoms of bladder infection, began vomiting and having diarrhoea. When she brought those concerns to C.G.H.’s attention, he brushed her off. [ 76 ] She consulted a number of medical practitioners in 2016 and 2017 to see if there was some organic basis for B.’s symptoms and behaviours but nothing was found. For most of that time, C.G.H. was dismissive of her concerns but by August 2017, he agreed that B. should see a counsellor. [ 77 ] C.G.H. said that B. did have some difficulty falling asleep from time to time at his home but he was able to help her to do so.

He did not notice that she had any fears about not being able to fall asleep or that she had the other symptoms when she was with him. [ 78 ] In 2016, S.T.M. suggested to C.G.H. that he reach out to B. on a regular basis. C.G.H. said he tried that for a considerable time but B. did not respond. He felt that S.T.M. was trying to track what arrangements he was making with B. for their time together. [ 79 ] B. told S.T.M. that she was upset about the type of and the volume of the movies at C.G.H.’s home. S.T.M. relayed those concerns to C.G.H. but B. continued to complain.

B. also complained about C.G.H.’s alcohol consumption, saying that he drank heavily and drank in the hot tub. S.T.M. asked C.G.H. if he would consider refraining from alcohol when he had B.

[ 80 ] C.G.H. said that he and T.C. consume alcohol, mostly wine, in moderation. He cannot drink more wine than that or he will get migraine headaches. He also stopped consuming alcohol in the hot tub. When B. was much younger, he would drink wine while studying and would dispose of the bottles the next day. He never hid any bottles anywhere in the house to hide his drinking. B. has never told him she is uncomfortable with him drinking in her presence. [ 81 ] S.T.M. said she and B. slept over at C.G.H.'s home in 2016 and 2017 to take care of his animals when he was absent.

On some of those trips, S.T.M. said B. expressed some fear of going there but would not say why. [ 82 ] S.T.M. said her and C.G.H.’s sexual relationship ended in late 2016. She went over to his home during the Christmas season of 2016 for some specific activities to try to show B. that they could still get along as a family but she was not there to have sex with C.G.H.

C.G.H. said that he and S.T.M. maintained a conjugal relationship well past the time she began her relationship with D.H. 2017 [ 83 ] B.’s fears and anxieties increased and she became so agitated she could not sleep and then would vomit because she was fearful that she would not get enough sleep and would die of exhaustion. C.G.H. said he recognized B.’s anxiety issues but said he saw no signs of her vomiting, having diarrhoea or having sleep difficulties. [ 84 ] In the summer of 2017 while B. was with C.G.H., she called S.T.M. 26 times in one 10-minute period when S.T.M. was out of cell range.

B. was distraught and was convinced S.T.M. was dead. After that, S.T.M. determined that she could never be out of cell range when B. was not with her. [ 85 ] In 2017, B.’s activities included swimming, piano, yoga, French tutoring and her counselling sessions. C.G.H. did not express any concerns about those activities. S.T.M. said that B. complained C.G.H. was not helping her with her French homework and that he told her he was letting her do it at S.T.M.'s home.

She said that at that time C.G.H. insisted that any of B.'s activities must occur on her parenting time. [ 86 ] C.G.H. said that S.T.M. would not communicate with him in advance to discuss in what activities B. participated. Rather, she would engage B. in those activities and then send him a list of what they were and that he had to ensure B. attended them during his parenting time. [ 87 ] C.G.H. said that in 2016 and 2017, his communication with S.T.M. had some difficulties but they were communicating regularly.

However, he began to realize that instead of him and S.T.M. acting as parents and trying to solve situations involving B. cooperatively S.T.M. and B. became closer. He was cut out of many conversations and decisions but was left to deal with problems that S.T.M. said B. was having. [ 88 ] In her emails, S.T.M. regularly described his time with B. in a negative fashion and that B. had negative thoughts about spending time with him. When he was with B. they had a good time and enjoy each other’s company.

There was separation anxiety in B. but largely because of S.T.M.’s actions. [ 89 ] There were occasions when B. told S.T.M. that she missed C.G.H. When they occurred, S.T.M. said she contacted C.G.H. and they tried to arrange time for him and B. to spend time together as soon as possible. In the summer of 2017, C.G.H. expressed a wish to spend more time with B. The Parties had discussions on how that could occur but B. continued to have difficulties with anxiety and her time with C.G.H. so, in August 2017, they agreed to engage a counsellor. Ms. Janice Butler [ 90 ] The first counsellor hired to help B. was Ms.

Janice Butler (Ms. Butler). From August 2017 until November 2017, there were seven or eight sessions with her. Ms. Butler did not give evidence at the trial. [ 91 ] Ms. Butler suggested that B. would benefit from more time with C.G.H. and a

schedule of increased and scheduled parenting time for C.G.H. commenced with two overnights per week, usually Mondays and Fridays. That continued until May 2018 when C.G.H. cancelled the Monday overnights when he started his summer fieldwork. S.T.M. said that the change upset her because B. was just getting used to the new

schedule but B. expressed happiness that she did not have to go to C.G.H.’s as often. [ 92 ] C.G.H. said that after several sessions Ms. Butler suggested that the bond between him and B. was much weaker than the bond between B. and S.T.M. She suggested that he and S.T.M. should work on reducing B’s reliance on her and that both of them should work on enhancing B.’s relationship and bonding with him to include increasing his parenting time to three nights per week. [ 93 ] He said that Ms. Butler told the Parties that B.'s anxiety was related to S.T.M.'s own anxiety issues.

It was soon after that that S.T.M. said she wanted to find a new counsellor. C.G.H. said that Ms. Butler was discharged because S.T.M. did not like the advice they were receiving. S.T.M. said that they jointly agreed not to continue with Ms. Butler because she was not a registered psychologist and as such, S.T.M.’s extended health plan would not pay her fees. [ 94 ] S.T.M. disagreed with Ms. Butler’s view that there was nothing wrong with B. that more time at C.G.H.’s could not resolve when, from her experience, B. was having great difficulties. In retrospect, given B.’s various subsequent diagnoses, Ms.

Butler was wrong in her analysis. [ 95 ] C.G.H. had one final session with Ms. Butler after the joint relationship ended. He said Ms. Butler suggested that S.T.M.’s relationship with B. was one of “enmeshment”, where S.T.M. was acting as a co-dependent to B. and that without some work, B. would not become her own person and personality. 2018

[ 96 ] On January 15, 2018, S.T.M. filed an Application to Obtain an Order seeking guardianship, contact with B., parenting time, allocation of parental responsibilities and a protection order. On the same date, S.T.M. filed an affidavit requesting a change in the parenting time from what was in the Agreement until B. was assessed, treated by a child psychologist and a

Section 211 Family Law Act ( FLA ) report was prepared. The affidavit alleged, that despite the Agreement, C.G.H.’s parenting time with B. had been sporadic and at his convenience. On January 31, 2018, S.T.M. withdrew the Application. [ 97 ] S.T.M. said there was an incident in January 2018 where, after helping to buy a birthday cake and present for C.G.H., B., at the last minute, refused to go to his home as arranged and locked herself in her bedroom. That resulted in a heated exchange between the Parties. S.T.M. alleged C.G.H. told her that he would take B. and S.T.M. would never see her again.

Soon after that incident B. told S.T.M. that she did not want to go to C.G.H.’s because he pinched her bottom and her nipples, he would watch her in the shower and he insisted she clean her private parts with her hand. Dr. Ambrose [ 98 ] S.T.M. researched other possible professionals to assist with B.’s behaviours and found Dr. Ambrose. C.G.H. agreed to engage Dr. Ambrose and she began working with B. in January 2018. C.G.H. said he was in favour of the move because of Dr. Ambrose’s greater education and experience in dealing with children of separated parents.

Her involvement with B. and the Parties is detailed elsewhere. [ 99 ] Starting in early 2018, B. became less resistant to spending time with C.G.H. and eventually voluntarily agreed to spend time with him including additional times scheduled on short notice. In May 2018, C.G.H. suspended his Monday night parenting time for the summer because of his fieldwork. [ 100 ] In the summer of 2018, C.G.H. asked S.T.M. if she and B. would monitor his time in the field and that he could report in each day by satellite phone.

S.T.M. agreed and C.G.H. felt it would be beneficial to help B. remember whom her father was and that he was out working in the field. [ 101 ] C.G.H. said that beginning in 2018, although his available time was truncated during the summer due to his fieldwork, he was available approximate 42% of the time. S.T.M. resisted him having additional time with B.

He could not recall whether he believed that routine and consistency was important for B. at that time because her ASD had not been diagnosed. [ 102 ] S.T.M. said that in the fall of 2018 when C.G.H. wanted to return to the previous schedule, B. was very resistant and started to exhibit a number of her previous anxiety behaviours of crying, not sleeping and breaking down. However, after considerable encouragement from her, B. did spend her parenting time with C.G.H. [ 103 ] Around this time, S.T.M. told C.G.H. that she was having difficulty with getting B. into the car to travel to the exchange location.

C.G.H. said that he could not understand what that problem was because whenever B. was with him they had a lot of fun and she seemed to enjoy their time together. [ 104 ] Although B. was making progress in 2018 with Dr. Ambrose’s help, S.T.M. said that near Halloween that year B. had a complete unravelling over a fear that S.T.M. was going to sell or give her to an orphanage. That lasted for about a week but B. seemed to come out of it.

C.G.H. said he was unaware of that episode until it was revealed at trial. [ 105 ] S.T.M. had earlier suggested using a Family Justice Counsellor (FJC) but it was late fall of 2018 when C.G.H. went to see them. He said that he was not getting very much parenting time although all the experts had suggested equal parenting time. [ 106 ] C.G.H. said that after his initial meeting with the FJC he made a complaint to the Ministry of Child and Family Development (MCFD) about S.T.M. continuing to wipe B.'s bottom given that she was now 10.

MCFD told him that they did not deal with matters like that because it was not a matter of imminent harm. MCFD told him that the FJC had reported the same matter. S.T.M. said that both Parties wiped B.'s bottom until approximately 2018. She acknowledged that is unusual but attributed B.'s needs in that regard to her later diagnosed ASD. 2019 [ 107 ] On January 29, 2019, S.T.M. filed another Application to Obtain an Order seeking guardianship, contact with B., parenting time, allocation of parental responsibilities and child support retroactive to July 1, 2014.

On the same date, S.T.M. filed an affidavit similar in content to her January 15, 2018 affidavit but with the addition of child support issues. [ 108 ] The meetings between C.G.H., S.T.M. with the FJC resulted in a draft Memorandum of Understanding, dated March 5, 2019, which provided C.G.H. with an extra hour of parenting time with B. On the very first time that was to occur, B. phoned him in tears saying she did not want to come. [ 109 ] After that incident there was to be another meeting with the FJC to discuss matters further. C.G.H. attended but S.T.M. did not.

C.G.H. said S.T.M. was avoiding the counselling sessions because she did not like what they were suggesting for his parenting time. S.T.M. said she advised the FJC of her unavailability on the scheduled day. C.G.H. did not get that information and no steps were taken after that. [ 110 ] On March 13, 2019, C.G.H. filed a Reply opposing the relief sought in the Application and counterclaiming for parenting time, child support and cancellation or reduction of any arrears of child support.

On April 3, 2019, S.T.M. filed a Reply to the Counterclaim opposing the relief sought by C.G.H. [ 111 ] In the spring of 2019, C.G.H. took B. to Vancouver and they went to the aquarium and Science World. He reported that B. had a good time and there were no major issues. S.T.M. said that although B. had good moments on that trip she talked more about that she was upset that C.G.H. and T.C. were arguing. At one point B. became very agitated and anxious and threw up in the taxi and that she had

a cold but C.G.H. and W.C. would not help her. [ 112 ] In early 2019, Dr. Ambrose suggested that S.T.M. start making small changes in her home so things were not always exactly the same to assist B. in adapting to different situations, in part, to accommodate the differences between the Parties’ homes. That continued until B.’s ASD was diagnosed when it was decided to return to a more predictable arrangement. [ 113 ] In 2019, Dr. Ambrose made a number of recommendations to the Parties of work to be done with B. to address her OCD symptoms. C.G.H. said he followed the direction of Dr.

Ambrose in that regard and after several months, Dr. Ambrose reported to him that B.’s OCD symptoms had diminished considerably. [ 114 ] C.G.H. said that although S.T.M. and D.H. had been living together since January 2017 he did not find out about it until the summer of 2019 when Dr. Ambrose mentioned it in passing. She thought that he already knew about that living situation.

Although he communicated with S.T.M. about D.H. and their relationship, he was not told that they were living together as a family. [ 115 ] He believes that many of B.’s anxieties during that time arose from her having to lie about her living situation in S.T.M.’s home. He also believes that S.T.M. encouraged B. not to disclose her family situation to him. C.G.H. said that after Dr.

Ambrose spoke to B. and advised her that he knew about the stepparent family B. seemed to release a lot of anxiety, was a lot more affectionate and much happier for a while. [ 116 ] S.T.M. initially said that she had told C.G.H. about D.H. around the time he moved in. Later she said she was unaware that she had to disclose to C.G.H. the living arrangements in her home and now that she was aware of that situation, she would do so in the future. [ 117 ] In 2019, C.G.H.'s parenting time with B. was four overnights per month and every Tuesday.

However, B. became resistant to the Tuesdays. [ 118 ] C.G.H. said that his parenting time with B. was further reduced and when he questioned S.T.M. about that, she insisted that it was B.'s choice and that she would always back up B.'s choices to which he responded that B. should not be making parenting decisions. He said S.T.M. repeated that position many times since the separation. [ 119 ] In May 2019, C.G.H. and T.C. purchased a home together in a rural area in the city. S.T.M. said B. had a lot of difficulty adjusting to that move and started to fall apart so she contacted Dr.

Ambrose for advice and assistance. B. wanted to pick out her room at C.G.H.'s new home but was told the room she selected was going to be C.G.H.'s office. There were also disagreements about what colour she could paint her room in his home and an interior decorator was consulted and rejected B.'s choice of colours as being too overwhelming. [ 120 ] C.G.H. said that the room B. selected was not a safe place for a bedroom due to egress issues in the case of a fire so he asked B. to make another choice that she agreed to without any complaint.

He took many steps to make B.’s bedroom area more comfortable for her by in many ways imitating what she has at S.T.M.’s home and renovating a bathroom to her tastes. This was done to help with B.’s sleep difficulties. When B. is at his home, he regularly asks her in the morning how she has slept the night before and in most cases she reports that she is sleeping reasonably well. [ 121 ] In the summer of 2019, C.G.H. took B. to the Okanagan on vacation.

S.T.M. said although B. enjoyed some activities that she was upset because she said she was forced play beer pong and she was told she was putting on too much sunscreen so it was taken away from her. She told S.T.M. that the sunscreen smelled like S.T.M. and she liked that so she put it on. [ 122 ] C.G.H. said that B. along with some other children were playing what they called “beer pong” but played it with fruit juices and soft drinks.

At one point B. was putting on so much sunscreen others at the gathering became concerned and intervened. [ 123 ] B. said she enjoyed when she and T.C. were studying about the Ogopogo phenomenon but she was upset when C.G.H. told her that Ogopogo was not real. When B. returns from a vacation that has some positive aspects but is otherwise negative from her perspective S.T.M. said she tries to focus on the positive aspects to reassure B. that she had a good time.

FAMILY CASE CONFERENCE ORDER [ 124 ] On August 26, 2019 the Parties attended a Family Case Conference (FCC) and entered into an Interim Consent Order for C.G.H.’s parenting time with B. which included:

a) Every Friday from after school until Saturday at 6:00 PM;

b) One Sunday in September, two in October and three in November and every month thereafter from 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM;

c) Every Tuesday from after school until 6:00 PM; and

d) Other times as may be agreed between them. (the FCC Order) [ 125 ] C.G.H. said that he agreed to the terms of FCC Order although he wanted more parenting time because he saw it as a starting point. He said that up to that time his parenting time with B. was considerably less than what the FCC Order provided. [ 126 ] For a short time, the new

schedule under the FCC Order went well with Parties communicating with B. in advance, about what would be happening during her time with C.G.H. S.T.M. said that did not last long and when she attempted to get C.G.H. to continue to provide advance information so she could preload B. he did not do so. [ 127 ] Early in the 2019 school year, B. refused to go to school one day. S.T.M. said that with the assistance of the vice principal, the

counsellor and the aboriginal support worker they made B. feel more comfortable in the classroom and immediately before the transition to C.G.H.’s home on Tuesdays and Fridays. B. continued to have Tuesday and Friday/Saturday parenting time with C.G.H. with some complaints but few issues because the transition occurred directly from school. [ 128 ] After the FCC, B. complained to S.T.M. that she did not like going to C.G.H.’s home and that she did not feel safe there.

She also expressed to S.T.M. her frustrations that C.G.H. simply refused to listen to her about what she wished to do or not to do and he called her a liar. [ 129 ] C.G.H. said that in September 2019, without consulting him, S.T.M. sent him emails outlining B.’s

schedule of extracurricular activities. He did not think S.T.M. should be able to arrange activities for B. during his parenting time and he and B. should consult about what activities they would do together during his time with her. [ 130 ] In the fall of 2019, B. had dance lessons on Friday nights when C.G.H. had her and he took her to those lessons. He enjoyed the dance lessons. B. convinced a friend to go to the dance lessons with her.

B. participated in a Christmas dance recital and after the recital, there was a gingerbread making party that B. enjoyed. [ 131 ] There were some occasions in the fall of 2019 where B. would complain of a migraine, decide not to go with C.G.H. and caught the bus to S.T.M.’s home without either Party knowing in advance.

S.T.M. agreed that on occasions when B. had migraine headaches, C.G.H. had over-the-counter medicines on hand and that with his medical knowledge as a paramedic he could have easily dealt with B.’s symptoms. [ 132 ] On another occasion in the fall of 2019, B. refused to go to C.G.H.'s home for the scheduled parenting time. According to S.T.M., B. was upset, angry, crying and vomiting and she supported B.'s decision not to go because she felt that more important to stabilize her physical and mental health.

She said that she would always do so in B.'s best interest. [ 133 ] S.T.M. said that she constantly encourages B. to spend time with C.G.H. through discussion, and, on occasions, bribery. Even when B. does not physically resist she often complains about having to go. [ 134 ] S.T.M. said that when she tells C.G.H. that B. chooses not to go on certain times it is not her giving B. the choice but it is simply advising C.G.H. that B. is refusing to go despite her best efforts to make it happen. She has never told B. that she has the right to choose.

B. obtained that information from other children she knows that they were permitted choose. [ 135 ] S.T.M. denied interfering with C.G.H.’s time or discouraging B. from seeing him but she sent several emails to C.G.H. in 2019 indicating that it was “up to her [B.]” to decide if she wanted to see him. One read, in part: “It is and always will be [B.’s] choice as to what/where she wants to be. I will support her choice, whichever it is, 100%.” [B.] has been made available every Friday except for one (our 6th annual water sliding extravaganza). If she chooses not to visit with you it is/was her choice alone.

I will always support her decisions and feelings”. “She know (sic) I encourage she goes and that’s why I am here!!! I’m not going to fight her once here. She does have a say. She does because of her age.” Sunday Issues [ 136 ] The Sunday day visits were unsuccessful almost immediately. S.T.M. said each Sunday was a big fight with B. to get her out of the house and into the car to go to the exchange location because she refused to go to C.G.H.’s. She sent many communications to C.G.H. pointing out the problem and proposed that C.G.H. have B.

From Friday night until Sunday afternoon rather than having the exchange on Saturday evening and Sunday morning but he did not respond. [ 137 ] C.G.H. said that after the FCC Order S.T.M. contacted him about changing the parenting time but that it would have resulted in him having less time with B. so he rejected her proposal.

He did not make any counter proposal. [ 138 ] C.G.H. said that when he did not obtain his parenting time, particularly on Sundays, he would explain to S.T.M. and B. that both The Report and the FCC Order, to which S.T.M. consented, provided him with more parenting time but that she was not complying. [ 139 ] S.T.M., and later D.H., took B. to every Sunday exchange as required by the FCC Order. S.T.M. said that once they arrived at the exchange location and B. refused to get out of the car C.G.H. did very little, if anything to get B. to go with him but accused her of letting B. decide.

She suggested to C.G.H. that he remove B. from her car but he declined to do so. [ 140 ] C.G.H. said on the Sunday exchanges R.M. or D.H. would never tell B. to get out of the car or encourage B. to go with him. Often they would just drive up and not even pull into a parking space. B. would roll down the window slightly and tell him she didn’t want to come and then they would drive off. He found their behaviour frustrating and heart breaking. [ 141 ] C.G.H. said that at the Sunday exchanges he sometimes remained in his vehicle and sometimes got out and went to the vehicle where B. was.

On every occasion, he attempted to speak to B. about coming with him. On no occasion did S.T.M. actively encourage B. to get out of the car and go with him. S.T.M. would sit there in silence and in prior or later communication between them; she would say she would not force B. to get out of the vehicle. [ 142 ] On several Sundays, he would try to encourage B. to come with him by suggesting things that they had done in past weeks that were fun or that there were things planned for that Sunday that were going to be fun.

On many occasions B. did nothing more than roll the window down an inch to and say she was not coming. On some occasions, she was not even dressed for the day, being still in her pyjamas.

[ 143 ] There were two videos of Sunday exchanges in evidence. One from November 24, 2019, that C.G.H. recorded where B. did not come with him and he said S.T.M. did not encourage her to come. The other from the April 26, 2020 exchange where D.H. said he felt intimidated by C.G.H.'s actions and that he did tell B. "Go with your dad". The circumstances of that exchange were different from many others because C.G.H. came up to the car door and T.C. was present. D.H. said change upset B. and she shut down.

C.G.H. said that the video shows he was not acting aggressively towards D.H. [ 144 ] C.G.H. said he attended all of the Sunday exchanges on time but was denied parenting time with B. every time. In addition, there was one other exchange where he was going to be late so he sent T.C. She arrived four minutes late and B. had already left the exchange location. [ 145 ] C.G.H. said on one of the Sunday exchanges he believed S.T.M. had a witness and that she was trying to set him up to pull B. out of the vehicle.

He was always polite, respectful and calm. [ 146 ] C.G.H. alleged that S.T.M. wrongfully withheld B. from him during his scheduled parenting time contrary to the FCC Order and

Section 61 of the FLA . He produced a spreadsheet of his missed parenting time in 2019 and 2020. S.T.M. did not deny that there were several days that C.G.H. missed his parenting time, almost exclusively on Sundays, but that he got some make up parenting time. C.G.H. said he got some extra parenting time in 2020 but it had nothing to do with the missed Sundays. [ 147 ] S.T.M. said other missed parenting time included:

a) The first two Tuesdays after the FCC Order when C.G.H. did not attend at the exchange location;

b) One Friday when [omitted for publication] was being exchanged at the same time as B. and she refused to go. After that arrangements were made to exchange [omitted for publication] beforehand to circumvent that problem;

c) On two occasions B. went to S.T.M.’s home on the bus while she was at work and she did not discover that until she arrived home;

d) On December 31, 2019, after S.T.M. told B. that she would need to speak to C.G.H., B. texted him and asked if she could babysit that evening. S.T.M. is not involved in scheduling B.’s babysitting appointments, B. does that directly with the parents; and

e) From March 10 – 31, 2020, the P arties had agreed S.T.M. would take B. to Scotland. The trip was planned months in advance but was cut short due to the Covid-19 pandemic and B. and S.T.M. were required to quarantine at home for 2 weeks. S.T.M. offered to have C.G.H. attend their home for B.’s birthday but he did not attend. [ 148 ] C.G.H. said some additional examples where he lost parenting time included:

a) Tuesday, September 3, 2019, he told S.T.M. that his truck was stuck in the mud and he would be late. She cancelled the parenting time;

b) Sunday, October 6, 2019 –S.T.M. told him that B. did not want to go with him, that the FCC Order was between them, that B. had not consented to it and that it was up to her to decide;

c) Sunday November 3, 2019 –B. told him that she did not want to come. He told S.T.M. that B. must come with him, but S.T.M. insisted it was B.’s choice. S.T.M. later informed him that she had a witness in the parking lot watching the exchange;

d) Sunday, November 24, 2019 – He was told by S.T.M. that B. did not want to come;

e) Sunday, December 8, 2019 – He was met by D.H. at the exchange location and B. refused to go with him;

f) Sunday, December 15, 2019 – B. rolled down her window slightly and shouted, “I don’t want to be with you today”. D.H. drove off with B. without discussion or conversation;

g) Sunday, December 22, 2019 –B. told him that she did not want to see him that day. In response to him saying that she had to come B. said that she did not have to come, and that it was her choice;

h) Tuesday, December 31, 2019 –S.T.M. advised him that B. had babysitting planned for the day and that she would not be coming for parenting time. He sought clarification if he was going to be getting B. for his parenting time and why B.’s babysitting was arranged on his parenting time. He referred S.T.M. to The Report that booking activities for B. things during the other Party’s time could be seen as interference;

i) Tuesday, February 4, 2020 – He was waiting for B. at school when he realized it was S.T.M.’s birthday so he told S.T.M. that he would make B. available to be with her for that day only. S.T.M. kept B. but no make-up parenting time was ever offered;

j) Sunday, February 9, 2020 –He noticed D.H. smiling when B. said that it was her choice whether she wanted to go with him or not. He asked “why?” and B. said he should “ask mom”;

k) Sunday, February 16, 2020 –B. refused to go with him. Before she drove off he pre-emptively asked questions and made positive statements to her about when she is with him and T.C., she has a good time, she smiles and laughs, he loved her, and that they had fun together;

l) Sunday, February 23, 2020 –B. arrived covered in a blanket, rolled her window down slightly and refused to come. He asked B. “who tells you that you get to choose?” at which point D.H. leaned over and whispered something to B. He asked D.H. what he was saying to B, but she shouted “NO!” and they drove off;

m) Sunday, March 1, 2020 –B. arrived covered in a blanket and refused to come. B. had a brief exchange with D.H. that appeared to

empower her, she said “bye” and they drove away;

n) March 10, 15, 17, 20, 24, 27, & 31, 2020- He agreed to allow S.T.M. to take B. to Scotland from March 9, to March 24, although he was never made aware of the trip directly by S.T.M. Their trip was cut short due to COVID-19 and they were required to quarantine at home for 14 days until March 31. He missed his entire scheduled Spring Break week with B. due to the quarantine;

o) Sunday, April 19, 2020 –B. said did not want to go. D.H. said B. does not want to come, and they will try again next time’. He explained that it is not B.’s choice, and he has a legal right to his parenting time to which D.H. responded with ‘try again next time’ and drove away;

p) Friday, April 24, 2020- S.T.M. suggested T.C. speak to B. privately, but B. still refused to come and they drove away. S.T.M. later informed him that she had recorded T.C.’s conversation with B. and would be forwarding the recording to her lawyer;

q) Sunday, April 26, 2020- D.H. arrived with B. B. said she would not come that day because she did not want to. There was a further extended exchange between him and D.H. in which he was calm, polite and not intimidating before D.H. drove off. This exchange was recorded by T.C.;

r) Sunday, May 24, 31, June 7, 21 July 5 and 26, 2020 – B. arrived, rolled down her window down and refused to come. He said that this was their scheduled time together but B. simply repeated that she did not want to come;

s) Sunday, June 28, 2020 - He did not receive his parenting time the day after the Shotgun Incident. S.T.M. contended that B. was very afraid because she had found the shotgun the day before. There was no earlier mention of the shotgun from B., her friend, the friend’s mother or S.T.M.;

t) In the summer of 2020, S.T.M. asked for three Tuesday’s with B. because she wanted to go see her family. In compensation, He requested an extra overnight that he never received. In August he requested a week with B. to go on a summer holiday but only received a single night; and

u) January 14 - January 19, 2021- He was unable to have his parenting time due to the MCFD investigation. While this was not a denial of parenting time, he should receive make up parenting time for these days. [ 149 ] In November 2019, Dr. Aube interviewed the Parties and others, prepared The Report and provided it to the Parties. C.G.H. endorsed Dr. Aube’s findings, opinions and recommendations.

S.T.M. seriously disagreed with the contents and accuracy of The Report but did agree with the recommendations concerning B.’s parenting time with each of the Parties. 2020 [ 150 ] In April 2020, soon after the Covid restrictions started, Dr. Ambrose suggested that an increase in C.G.H.’s parenting time with B. might be appropriate because B.’s anxieties and stress were at a reduced level and school was cancelled. The Parties agreed with that idea but it did not occur. [ 151 ] C.G.H. and T.C. brought horses to their home.

At first B. was very enthusiastic about the horses, enjoyed riding and spending time with them. C.G.H. said this was but one example of him acting on S.T.M.’s suggestion to get B. engaged in activities but they do not work out. [ 152 ] One of T.C.’s mares was due to foal in May 2020. B. was the very excited about the prospective birth and insisted she be notified as soon as the foal was born. The day of the foal's birth B. came to C.G.H. home earlier than her scheduled arrival time. B. wanted to spend a lot of time with the foal going as far as sleeping in its stall.

She was very engaged. [ 153 ] The Unicorn Club is an equine-based therapy resource for children with special needs. It has had a lot of success working with children who have a variety of disabilities. T.C. and C.G.H. thought such a resource would benefit B. given her interest in the foal. B. went for one lesson and then within a few weeks said she was no longer interested in that activity. When the foal was a few months old, S.T.M. said B. was no longer interested in horses. [ 154 ] S.T.M. said that B. said that she felt forced to go riding and stopped all interest in the horses.

This upset S.T.M. because she had hoped that B. would enjoy the horses at both C.G.H.’s and her home. She was unaware that B. had the opportunity to participate in the Unicorn Club. [ 155 ] On June 1, 2020, C.G.H. filed a Notice of Motion and an Application for Urgent Hearing under the Court’s Covid-19 protocol (the Motion). On the same day, he filed an affidavit attaching numerous documents that were resubmitted at trial. The Shotgun Incident [ 156 ] On June 27, 2020, B. and a friend found a shotgun under C.G.H.’s bed. This occurred when C.G.H. and T.C. were away for slightly over an hour purchasing lifejackets.

During that time, B. and her friend were frightened by some noises they heard. They contacted S.T.M. and she suggest that they look around the house to satisfy themselves that there was nothing there. [ 157 ] In doing so they went into C.G.H.’s room, which S.T.M. was unaware B. was prohibited from doing, and discovered a shotgun under the bed.

They took pictures of the gun and sent them to the friend's mother who contacted S.T.M. and later C.G.H. to ensure that the children were safe. [ 158 ] S.T.M. said that the children were left alone for an extended period and that they were very frightened by what they found under the bed. C.G.H. said the shotgun was usually stored in a gun safe but was under the bed because there had been some bear sightings in the neighbourhood and his mare had recently foaled and he was concerned about a bear attacking.

[ 159 ] At some point subsequent to the Shotgun Incident, an entry was made on the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC) database concerning C.G.H. even though the RCMP never interviewed him about the matter and he was never charged. C.G.H. was very concerned that the CPIC notation would pose difficulty in him renewing his firearms license, which he requires for his fieldwork, and that in any future dealings with the police or any international travel he may be restricted because of that notation.

C.G.H. said that he believed S.T.M. had something to do with the CPIC notation and that he had to spend considerable time and money to get the entry reversed. [ 160 ] S.T.M. said she did not make the notation herself nor did she know who made that it. She had no input into it nor access to that part of the file because of the nature of the investigation. August 2020 Order [ 161 ] On June 19 and July 3, 2020, the Motion was heard. On August 13, 2020, the Court released Reasons for Judgment found at S.T.M. v C.G.H . 2020 BCPC 181 and granted an interim order that included:

a) Specific parenting time to C.G.H. with B;

b) Recognizing the Parties as B.’s guardians;

c) Equal division of parental responsibilities except for B.’s health decisions which were granted to S.T.M.;

d) Specific times, dates and exchange locations for C.G.H.’s parenting time with B. with additional enabling clauses;

e) Communication methods with B. and between the Parties;

f) Arranging activities for B. and ensuring she attends those activities;

g) Conduct orders, and

h) Police enforcement if parenting time was denied. (the August 2020 Order) [ 162 ] The Reasons for Judgment made a number of suggestions to assist the Parties in trying to move forward in their relationships with B. including:

a) S.T.M. reduce her electronic communication with B. during C.G.H.’s parenting time as endorsed by Dr. Ambrose and that S.T.M. should make that clear to B.; and

b) That C.G.H. take more time to listen to B. and understand her perspective and anxieties. [ 163 ] C.G.H. said he never spoke to B. about the police enforcement clause in the August 2020 Order. After the FCC Order, he did have some conversations with S.T.M. about that order in front of B. However, he has not had any discussions with or made comments to B. about lawyers, judges and the Court since the August 2020 Order. [ 164 ] S.T.M. said that after the August 2020 Order things went better for B. and she was prepared to go to C.G.H.’s with only a few complaints or concerns.

Those concerns mostly occurred on Mondays in the early fall of 2020 after her time with C.G.H. when B. would complain of being tired, being unable to focus and having migraines. [ 165 ] C.G.H. asserted and S.T.M. denied that the police enforcement clause resulted in B. going to all of the exchanges because S.T.M. was afraid of the embarrassment of her [omitted for publication] colleagues having to come to enforce the order. [ 166 ] S.T.M. suggested, through Dr. Ambrose, that B. and C.G.H. have a session with Dr.

Ambrose on those Mondays to work on any issues B. had arising from the weekend but that never occurred. [ 167 ] Despite that, frequent electronic communication between S.T.M. and B. continued during C.G.H.’s parenting time. S.T.M. said that she would only respond to B.’s messages when B. reached out to her.

However, the documentary evidence showed S.T.M. initiating text messages with B. on various occasions. [ 168 ] It appears that, following the August 2020 Order, S.T.M. never communicated to B. that it was inappropriate for B. to be contacting her on every slight matter, despite correspondence from her counsel that she would address the issue. [ 169 ] C.G.H. said that both before and after the August 2020 Order B.’s electronic contact with S.T.M. continued unabated with tens, and sometimes hundreds, of various types of electronic communication occurring between them every day when B. is with him .

He said B. would often take her iPad to the bathroom and stay in there for hours communicating with S.T.M. [ 170 ] C.G.H. said it is important to consider the electronic communication to understand how B. acts and how S.T.M. responds. C.G.H. produced a spreadsheet of a sampling of messages between S.T.M. and B., from March 2019 to August 2021 including the following examples:

a) On March 29, 2019, 35 texts in less than 5 minutes. No response from S.T.M.;

b) On June 5, 2020, many pages of emojis texted to S.T.M.;

c) September 13/14, 2020 – 73 messages and 31 deleted messages and S.T.M. responded 13 times;

d) October 12, 2020 – 72 messages and 17 deleted messages;

e) November 21, 2020 – 55 messages and 25 deleted messages;

f) December 6, 2020 – 60 messages and 6 deleted messages;

g) January 1, 2021 – 112 messages;

h) February 14, 2021 – 69 messages;

i) July 5, 2021 – 177 messages; and

j) August 2, 2021 – 137 messages. [ 171 ] S.T.M. said that if she does not respond, B. begins to spiral and will just continue to text and call until she answers. This often happens in the middle of the night when B. cannot sleep. S.T.M. said she worked hard with Dr. Ambrose to limit these communications in a way that is healthy for B. [ 172 ] C.G.H. said B. insists on watching television at night in her bedroom before she falls asleep. This is not healthy and was discouraged by Dr. Ambrose.

B. should be listening to music or meditative sounds to assist her in her sleep and not watching television or spending time communicating with S.T.M. on her tablet because that reduces the effectiveness of her sleep. [ 173 ] Dr. Aube was unaware of the amount of electronic communication between B. and S.T.M. at the time of The Report. When informed of that issue at trial she said that it was impeding C.G.H.’s parenting time, and it was like using a “remote control” over B.

If she had known that information prior to The Report, she would have recommended C.G.H. have final decision - making authority. [ 174 ] The August 2020 Order included conduct orders about respectful communication. C.G.H. alleged that S.T.M. has either ignored or made a mockery of those orders with statements, messages and actions that are disparaging of him and do nothing to help support building his relationship with B.

She negatively critiqued his decisions and household rules to B. from a distance. [ 175 ] The August 2020 Order provided that after one Party drops B. off at school for an exchange, the other Party becomes responsible for any matters that might arise at school. C.G.H. said that S.T.M. breached that order by frequently attending B.’s school during his parenting time. [ 176 ] S.T.M. said that B.’s behaviours became more worrisome in the early winter of 2020 when she started writing depressive poems, talked about running away from C.G.H.’s and caused damage to his home. [ 177 ] B. kept a journal at C.G.H.’s home.

In the journal, parts of which she shared with S.T.M., she expressed deep hatred and loathing for C.G.H. B. also used a rock to scratch the floor in her bedroom at C.G.H.’s home and sent a photo of that to S.T.M. S.T.M. said that she told B. that such behaviour was inappropriate. She brought those two matters to Dr. Ambrose’s, but not C.G.H.’s, attention. S.T.M. said she is not prepared to tell B. that her feelings and actions are wrong even if they are inappropriate.

B. shared that information with her because B. believes she can share everything with S.T.M. [ 178 ] C.G.H. said when B. scratched her bedroom floor at his home she communicated with S.T.M. about wanting to come home and S.T.M. said she would attempt to make that happen. He was not aware of the scratched floor until much later and it was not a major issue. [ 179 ] S.T.M. said B. has a lot of difficulty with cutlery at meal times. B. reported that she was upset when she was in Jasper with C.G.H. and he was critical of her use of cutlery.

People with ASD often have difficulty with fine motor skills such as eating with cutlery. B. reported that she could not stand the noise the knife was making on the plate so she tipped it upside down. When B. got home from Jasper, she took all the cutlery in S.T.M.’s home and hid it. S.T.M. did not see that as problematic. [ 180 ] In November 2020, S.T.M. suggested to C.G.H. a change to the August 2020 Order such that B. would be returned to her on Sunday evening rather than to school on Monday to give B. time to decompress and get a good night’s sleep but he your refused.

C.G.H. said that when S.T.M. contacted him about reducing his parenting time from Monday morning to Sunday evening he refused her suggestion because the Court recognized that an increase in his parenting time was appropriate and both The Report and Dr.

Ambrose endorsed that view. [ 181 ] C.G.H. said that after the August 2020 Order, which included the police enforcement clause, he did not miss any of his scheduled parenting time with B. except for during the time MCFD was dealing with a disclosure made by B. in January 2021. [ 182 ] C.G.H. said that since the August 2020 Order when B. comes to his home she is initially confused and anxious but soon falls into the routine of the household enjoying herself and activities they engage in.

T.C. said that it was around September 2020 that they started noticing improvements with B. being more affectionate with her and C.G.H. Since B.’s time increased to five days in 2021, she has been even more able to relax and fall into the routine of his household while she is there. [ 183 ] However, on the last day before she is to return to S.T.M.’s home, B. becomes withdrawn a

[…]