Thoughts on Preventing Problems Between Parents

I have not mentioned in what seems a long time how you people have the means to prevent spending unnecessary time in a courtroom. Put plainly, being a jerk results more often than not in a visit to the lawyer and probably to a courtroom.

If you want to prevent problems, read the following from The Mother of All Parenting Blogs (and you might want to check out the rest of the blog, too).

Don't assume that the problem will take care of itself once the baby is no longer a baby, the toddler is no longer a toddler, etc. You've still got a lot of years of parenting ahead of you -- and you definitely want to be on the same page of the parenting playbook by the time your kids hit the preteen or teen stage.

Try to engage your partner in a heart-to-heart discussion about the hopes and dreams that led you to want to become parents in the first place: the types of parents you want to be and the types of kids you want to raise. If you've never had this type of conversation, there's no time like the present to have it. Try to have this conversation when you're both relaxed and in a positive and upbeat mood. If you can't have this type of conversation without the conversation dissolving into an argument, consider couples therapy (so that you can work on your communication skills and resolve the outstanding issues you have as parents and as a couple).

Consider taking a parenting course together. That way, the information you're trying to discuss with your partner will be reaching your partner via a neutral third-party rather than always being filtered through you.

Share parenting materials that you've found particularly helpful. And encourage your partner to share parenting materials that express his or her ideas about parenting, too. (You don't have to agree with all the viewpoints expressed. What you're trying to do is get an understanding of what your partner is thinking and feeling about a particular issue. That's the first step to talking the issue through and finding some common ground.)

Take stock of all the things you do agree about rather than just focusing on all the things you don't. Then find ways to build on that common foundation in your lives as parents.

More importantly, ask yourself how following this advice hurts you or your children.

New Indiana Court of Appeals Case - Grandparent Visitation and Step-Parent Adoption

From today's Indiana Lawyer came COA: inequity in grandparent visitation act

A.B. and N.E. opposed L.D's adoption; the trial court granted some visitation to N.E. before the adoption was finalized. Once the adoption petition was granted, the paternal grandparents told N.E. they planned to phase out visitation with her.

The mother and N.E. appealed several issues, including N.E.'s rights to visitation as a grandparent. But based on the language of the act, her visitation can't continue now that the child has been adopted, the Court of Appeals concluded. The act provides that visitation rights survive adoption by a stepparent or person who is biologically related to the child. Since the paternal grandparents aren't biologically related to L.D., N.E. isn't entitled to visitations as a matter of law under the act, wrote Judge Edward Najam.

In addition, if N.E. had been the one to adopt the boy, then the paternal grandparents wouldn't have had any rights under the act because N.E. isn't biologically related to the boy.

"Whether this consequence was intended or should be rectified we leave for the Legislature to decide," wrote the judge.

I am actually a bit more interested in the due process issue raised as I really do not think this factual situation will be common.

More importantly, it shows how legislation and litigation interplay with one another. I doubt many in Indiana's General Assembly imagined the factual situation of the litigation when they voted on the legislation.

Indiana COA allows woman to establish maternity

I got notice of this from The Indiana Lawyer and I am relying on its COA allows woman to establish maternity. Not the usual material for this blog but I find it intriguing - if for nothing else it shows how family law does get into the cutting edge of social change and how the court use old tools to meet new uses.

"The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed the denial of an agreed petition to establish paternity and maternity of a child who was born of a surrogate, finding equitable relief should allow the biological mother to establish she is in fact the baby's biological mother."

***

The state argued in In the matter of the paternity and maternity of infant R., No. 64A03-0908-JV-367, equitable relief may be afforded under the circumstances of the case; T.G., V.G., and D.R. claimed Indiana's paternity statutes could be construed so as to apply equally to their situation.

"While we conclude that the public policy for correctly identifying biological parents is clearly evinced in our paternity statutes, it does not follow that we must embark on a wholesale adoption and application of these statutes in order to provide relief under the narrow set of circumstances we are presented with today," wrote Judge L. Mark Bailey. "Rather, it is for the Legislature to evaluate and deliberate comprehensive proposals for changes to these statutes."

The appellate court decided, however, that these circumstances suggest that equity should provide an avenue for relief. If equity ignores technological realities the law has yet to recognize, a baby born under these circumstances would be denied the opportunity other children have to be linked to those with whom he shares DNA. A surrogate would be denied a remedy available to putative, but not biological fathers, to remove an incorrect designation on a birth certificate and avoidance of legal responsibilities for someone else's child, the judge continued.

Dallas Court Goes Paperless - Hello, Indiana?

I do not often post on criminal matters but DFW Texas News on Twitter's Dallas County criminal court records go paperless caught my eye.

The federal courts have been doing this for several years now. I will admit to some gripes about that system but people this will come to pass some day.

Anyone have any thoughts?

So You Want to Be Your Own Lawyer

Read Re N: How not to write a skeleton from Family Lore. Short post with John Bolch providing a commentary that ought to clarify how to write something going before a judge.

Yes, it is English but that makes no difference at all. The legal system is a formal system - regardless of all the Judge Judys on television - there are rules to follow. Some are written and some are not -I would call the rule violated in the Family Lore post as an unwritten one but inherent in any formal setting.

Yes, we lawyers do relax a bit but even then it is within the framework of a system. We know where to tread and how to tread to avoid the bombs. After all, that is one of the multitude of things we do for our clients.

Romance and Vetting the Significant Other

Not my idea but something published by the Indianapolis Business Journal's NewsTalk blog:

Vetting your sweetheart

With Valentine’s Day just around the corner, a Purdue University expert recommends the marriage-minded conduct some pragmatic due diligence before engagement rings find their way onto fingers.

It’s widely known that financial problems undermine many a marriage. To that end, Sharon Burns, an associate professor of consumer sciences and retailing, suggests looking for bad habits before they wreak havoc. Not easy to do during such a passionate time, maybe, but still wise. Here they are:

--Your sweetheart has borrowed lots of money from you once or has borrowed from you more than once. This can signal they’re living above their means or managing money poorly.

--He or she buys lots of the latest clothes, gadgets, cars and other luxuries. Big spending can reveal their needing a crutch to make them feel better and, ultimately, personal insecurity or lack of discipline.

--Your love needs financial help from family or friends. “Mature adults support themselves,” Burns says.

--They pay for normal living expenses with credit cards and then don’t pay the bill in full at the end of the month, a “sure sign of disaster ahead."

--They can’t hold down a job. In a normal economy, you should wonder if they’re lazy or lack self discipline.

Which leaves me wondering if the old idea of courtship doesn't have something over dating? After all, if one has been courting (or long term dating) how can one fail to notice that the significant other has problems holding down a job?

Which then leads me to wonder if the divorce rate's climbing numbers has less to do with some ill-defined ease of getting a divorce and more with the parties being less well-prepared for marriage.

And I will leave you with this last thought: the law can do a lot but society can do even more.

Just Because There is a Law

Everyone should read Lesson Learned From Case of Child Abducted to Brazil and Retained for Five Years: An International Convention is Only As Good as Its Enforcement Mechanism from Florida Divorce * Child Custody * Domestic Violence Law Lawyer for more than its obvious topic:

Yet, in a recent case there, the Indian Supreme Court ruled that an Indian Wife who had been permanently residing in the UK with her Husband and their child, must return to the UK with their child for custody proceedings there.

Ultimately, the adverse impact of Brazil’s conduct on future trade with the US may have propelled Brazil to finally send the boy home.

Now, a Congressman from that boy’s home state, New Jersey, has introduced legislation intended to promote enforcement of the Hague Convention by appointing an official to monitor compliance and to empower the government to impose sanctions for noncompliance.

Enforcement falls down for two reasons: 1) the parties think someone else will enforce their court order; or 2) the court itself does not do as it should. The Brazil case falls in the second category.

Without a person taking action a court order remains only paper.

When one of our courts go off into the weeds, the remedy is an appeal.

A statute is only as good as its enforcement mechanism.

News - Federal Judge Stops Changes in Foster Car Payments

While outside my practice area, this may interest some of my readrs. The Indiana Lawyer published Judge blocks DCS rate changes for now last week:

A federal judge in Indianapolis has temporarily blocked the Indiana Department of Child Services from reducing the amounts it pays to foster and adoptive parents and juvenile-service providers.

After an hours-long hearing Wednesday in two combined cases against the state agency, U.S. Judge Sarah Evans Barker of the District Court's Indianapolis Division granted a preliminary injunction against the DCS. This means that service providers and those adoptive and foster parents will continue getting the same money received during 2009, at least until the case progresses or the court orders differently.

***

Some people have already seen reductions in their payment, and those issues may be worked out at a later time, the parties said.

"We consider this a victory for children, and we're very glad that our concerns were heard," said Cathleen Graham, IARCCA executive director. "The children we're working with are very vulnerable and need these services, and I believe the judge saw the potential for harm with any delay in doing this. We're very satisfied with what she said about the importance of that promise of quality care that's stated in federal law. That speaks to what we as providers are very concerned about when we offer these services to children and their families."

Ken Falk, legal director for the ACLU of Indiana, said his class of clients was also pleased about the judge's ruling as it ensures they won't be faced immediately with lower reimbursements for the services they provide. The state now has a chance to appeal the decision, but if that doesn't happen then the case can move to trial, Falk said.

In response to the ruling, DCS spokeswoman Ann Houseworth said the agency was disappointed but will abide by it while officials continue pursuing all options to provide for the best possible care. As no official written ruling has yet been issued, Houseworth said no decision had yet been made about appealing the decision.

Collaborative Divorce - A Somewhat Contrarian View

Eastern North Carolina Divorce's Collaborative Divorce? Don't Hold Your Breath. provides a counterpoise (sort of) to my Should Indiana Have a Statute Promoting Collaborative Divorce? and Explaining Collaborative Divorce.

Traditional divorce already has many of the supposed benefits of collaborative divorce. Attorneys do talk to each other, do realize that it is better for their clients (and their children) to work things out, and really do try to reach agreements for their clients. The only thing that collaborative divorce adds is that the attorneys will withdraw if no agreement is reached. And when that happens, clients have to go through the additional expense of hiring new lawyers and paying them for work that their previous lawyers already did.

To this author, this approach assumes that divorce attorneys try to avoid settling cases so that they can pad billable hours through litigation. I don't subscribe to this cynical approach. My experience is that most attorneys represent their clients interests zealously and honestly. Sometimes this includes going to trial; these cases would have to go to trial even had they begun in the collaborative process.

The only difference is that their clients had to hire two attorneys.

My views probably hew closer to my North Carolina colleague. Settlemetn provides a better resolution for more cases than going to court. Most lawyers know lawyers will work to settle a case than not. I have two rather long pieces on knowing when to fight and when not to here and here.

However, I think every family law attorney knows that there are lawyers who will never settle - they have made their reputations as fearless fighters. Clients think that their fees are the price of admission to litigation. These two mindsets hinder the family law process.

About the fearless fighter type, I recall a hearing in 2008 when a judge lectured opposing counsel and myself with surely this could have been settled by my calling opposing counsel. Other attorney when told about this will laugh. They know that the aottrney's business model is based on not settling cases and they never return calls.

Clients need to realize that the great amount of fees comes from not being in court but in preparing for court - the witness and exhibit preparation, the discovery process. One can invest very heavily in a case that has not yet seen a courtroom. Cutting short the trial preparation need seems to me the economic bonus to the client side of the equation.

Requiring collaborative law ought not remove the lawyer's responsibility to seek settlement of the case. I agree wholeheartedly with my North Carolina colleague on that point.

I see educating about collaborative law as educating about the legal system. The general public needs to understand that their images of a glorious legal battle in a courtroom are wrong. Those images belong on television. They need to understand that what they are paying for is reaching their goals in a case - not merely going into a courtroom.

Now For Some Legal Humor from England

Oh, I am thankful for never having the case described by BabyBarista on their London Times blog under WBLG: Year 4, week 15: judicial blackmail

“Got you a nice little earner for you for tomorrow,” said my Instructing Solicitor SlipperySlope on Monday. “Family case. Very simple.”

“But I don’t know anything about family law,” I answered.

“Don’t worry about that. You probably still know more than me and anyway, it’ll settle, I promise.” Then he added slightly mysteriously, “The judge’ll see to that.

So it was that I ended up doing my first family law case yesterday. I’d done a bit of research but was still massively out of my depth and I admit that my knees were shaking just a little. Which wasn’t helped any when the judge then boomed at my opponent: “Who’s paying for this complete waste of time and money?”

“Er, er,…” My opponent didn’t seem to be any more confident than me in this area and he was stumped. “Er, Your Honour, may I please take instructions?”

“You certainly may. But let me warn you now. If this case is being funded by the taxpayer and it doesn’t settle pretty sharpish, it’s the sort of case where the papers may just well end up with the inland revenue.”

Towards a Successful Relationship

Self Growth Engine has How Little Things Become a Big Problem. I can say from my own experiences find the following very accurate:

Everyone has quirks and characteristics that may be annoying to others, especially when you are spending a lot of time together. The dirty socks on the floor, feet on the couch, dirty dishes in the sink, a unique laugh…When you first start dating someone, these characteristics are not as apparent and may not be an issue. But as time ticks on, these once excusable traits become an issue. However, it is not the trait itself that causes the problem; it is the meaning that we attach to the action. The top 10 complaints that people who are dating have are thinking an act is deliberate, messiness, feeling unloved, feeling unappreciated, feeling controlled, not feeling intimate, flirting, personality conflict, lack of fairness, and feeling criticized. All of the above problems are caused by a common factor; our perceptions and the meaning we attach to others actions. In order to have a successful relationship we must learn to look at other peoples actions in a productive way instead of a destructive pattern.

Give all the article a read.

Out Of All the Tiger Woods Blather, Here is an Interesting Idea

I avoided discussing or mentioning anything about Tiger Woods' marital problems because I just did not see any thing interesting for me or my readers. That is until I read Lawinfo Weblog's Tiger Woods Mistress Reveals Voluntary 3-Year Affair….. Should There Liability for Intentional Interference With Marriage?

The reports are all over the media of how Tiger Woods apparently carried on an affair with his mistress, Jamiee Grubbs, for almost three years! Some reports (mostly tabloids at this stage) quote Jamiee as stating that Tiger would visit her every few months and they’d “enjoy each other’s company.” Aside from the issue of what can be in a husband’s (or wife’s) mind when cheating… what is the deal with these women who go along with these full-blown affairs with men they know are married?

I’ve written previously about the idea of whether or not you should be able to sue the person who has an affair with your spouse or partner… and your comments are greatly appreciated and insightful. In that post, I intentionally focused on the situation of carrying on an all-out affair with full knowledge that the other person was married. In the business world, one can be held liable for tortiously interfering with a business relationship. For instance, if a person convinces another to break his/her business promises or contracts, or prevents a business person from living up to the same, the meddler can be held liable to the injured party who did not receive the benefits of the business relationship. Should there be a similar legal concept for marital relationships? Isn’t that what these cheating partners do?…. convince a husband to break his marriage promises, interfere with the husband’s marital relationship, preventing the wife from receiving all the benefits of the marriage relationship to which she is otherwise entitled?

***

Interesting arguments on both sides. After reading so many of your comments, it is clear to me that a betrayed spouse certainly is left without a legal remedy…. without a “day in court” …. against a man or woman who intentionally interferes with his or her marriage. Tiger’s wife can only renegotiate her prenuptual agreement… she has no direct remedy against the woman who intentionally, and seriously, caused her injury.

Yes, I call that an interesting idea and with which I have some serious problems. As noted above, this idea comes too close to an alienation of affection suit. Indiana is not going to give alienation of affection a revival. (Well, that is my opinion and I am sticking to it.)

Secondly, having some knowledge of third party interference with contracts, I see both a lot of technical/practical problems:

1. That the third party knew of the marriage contract (does not apply to Woods but if you are going to propose a legal remedy it has to apply generally).
2. The offended spouse will be getting money damages (this being a civil suit), but how will they be calculated?
3. Are the courts or legislatures going to import the justification and/or malice requirements?
4. Since money is the remedy in a civil suit, remember that this money will have to come out of the defendant's assets and/or income. You can get a big judgment but not be able to collect. I call that adding insult to injury.
5. Speaking of judgments, how many plaintiffs will want to put this kind of case to a jury trial? Might take a good look at Family Law Prof's Hope Cheating Spouse's Lover is Rich and especially the comment. I think that comment represents what will be the general reaction of your typical juror.
   

Yes, the idea is interesting but it is not a good idea.

Talk to Lawyer Day - Anderson and Madison County

Talk to Lawyer Day is 1/18 at Mounds Mall, during the day. I will be there 10 am - noon. This is free. Please feel free to pass this information along to anyone who might benefit.

Court Files, Court Records and Getting Them

Call this a reactionary post. Me reacting to Endangered Fathers' Different Uses Of Divorce Records with that is not so for Indiana.

Divorce records are maintained by the vital records department or in the health statistics department. Any person wishing to access these records may do so by placing a request with the concerned department holding the information. They can also obtain copies of the records which are uncertified copies if you are not one of the concerned parties in the divorce. Only concerned parties in the divorce can obtain a certified copy of the divorce certificate

No - our court records are keep by our county clerks.

No - you go to the county clerk, tell them the cause number and they get the file for you. (Excepting Marion and Hamilton Counties).

I got to say that I do not for certain about uncertified records being all a non-party can get - never had to deal with the issue.

The rest of the article raised similar problems for me. It is my standard operating procedure to give clients copies of everything. Fire and flood may get some but there should be no ordinary reason for one of my clients to need to go to the county clerk to get a copy of their file. Which is one of two reasons I have problems with this paragraph:

These records can help the individual ensure that the divorce has legally occurred. In many cases of uncontested divorces, the respondent party may not be aware of the settlement of the divorce. A divorce record helps in proving that the divorce has been finalized in the Court of Law.

Noooooooooooooooo. Here we get a Decree of Dissolution from a judge that is signed and sealed. We give it to the client. That same Decree goes out to the opposing party where there is a uncontested divorce. Also, our Chronological Case Summaries are mailed out to the parties who do not have lawyers. For all my grousing about Indiana, I cannot imagine a court system where a party is not aware of a case's end.

And in the context of Indiana, this just sounds bizarre:

When a person intends to marry again after a divorce, the divorce certificates should be provided to legally allow the person to remarry. It also helps resolve issues arising in the care of children born out of the marriage where divorce has taken place. A woman intending to change her name that carries the surname of the ex-husband can do so by providing these records.

If those problems were not enough to drive you crazy, a larger one looms. The Indiana Law Blog published Ind. Courts - "Indiana courts moving toward unified records system: But private firm pushes competing setup" Part I and here are what seem the choice bits:

That (excluding the "Part I") is the headline to a lengthy story today by Harold J. Adams of the Louisville Courier Journal. It begins:

After nine years and $51million spent, Indiana is progressing toward a statewide computer system that may eventually connect the records of all the state's 401 courts to each other, other state agencies and the public.

That would allow anyone with Internet access to check the history and status of any court case anywhere in the state. It would also give judges and attorneys a quick way to determine whether someone in their local court has had a role in other cases elsewhere.

But the move toward a single system isn't without its wrinkles. Even though the state system is free to counties, another vendor already handles court records for more than half of Indiana's 92 counties and is fighting to keep that business — and add more. * * *

Indiana's Odyssey system is run by the Indiana Supreme Court through the Judicial Technology and Automation Committee, known as JTAC and headed by Sullivan. The state wants to replace what Sullivan says is a mishmash of 23 different electronic case management systems in use across the state with a single, unified system.

“I and the members of our court — and I think most Indiana judges — are of the view that we would be much better off if all Indiana courts were using the same case management system,” Sullivan said. * * *

But while some counties are eager to connect to Odyssey, others have declared they won't participate.

Kosciusko County Clerk Jason McSherry wants no part of the statewide system.

“From a taxpayer standpoint, I don't have a lot of faith in anything the state or government runs,” McSherry said. “I think they ought to let the private sector take care of that.”

(Er, has no one informed the Kosciusko County Clerk that she is part of the government?).

I take the view that the legal system belongs to the citizens and since our tax dollars help fund it, then the information in and about those courts should be freely available without anyone making a profit off of what was created with our tax dollars.

More importantly, this article may make clear to everyone that no state wide data exists about our legal system but remains pretty much bound up in the county courthouses. In some ways not much different than in 1816 or 1851 or 1973. Think about that for a while.

(Since i derafted this post, The Indiana Lawyer published Harrison County joins Odyssey.)

Tips for a Better Co-Parenting in 2010

I like DIVORCE LAW INDIANA's New Years Resolutions for better co-parenting enough to quote it at length:

The New Year brings an opportunity for a fresh start and new beginnings. It may also be a good time to consider making New Year Resolutions for becoming a better co-parent with your ex. Here are some suggestions from an article by Brette Sember at http://www.divorce360.com/:

Let us hope that we can all have a better 2010.

Commenting on Prosecutors in Indiana Paternity Cases

Z.S. v. J.F. rises and falls on the issues of notice and knowledge, and particularly how the Hamilton County child support enforcement prosecutor did not deliver a custody petition to the mother. This passage raised something that I have observed for several years now:

Here, Father filed a petition for custody but failed to serve it on Mother, whom he knew was without counsel. Although the Hamilton County prosecutor‟s office received a copy of the petition, it did not forward it to Mother since it was not representing her. Thus, Mother was unaware that custody would be at issue during the final hearing. Based upon the agreed preliminary order, she believed that only issues regarding child support, medical expenses, and tax exemptions were to be resolved during the final hearing. Although Mother attested that she had received the petition for custody when shown the document from a distance, she later testified that she believed the document shown to her to be Father‟s discovery request. At no time during the proceedings, did Mother have benefit of counsel.

From conversations I have had with women who have used the prosecutor's office to establish paternity, they do not understand how they do not have a lawyer for everything.

For a very long time,Indiana law provided for the local prosecutor's office to represent people wishing to establish paternity.

IC 31-14-4-2

Prosecuting attorney to file action and represent child
Sec. 2. (a) Upon the request of:

(1) the child;
(2) the mother or expectant mother;
(3) a man alleging to be the father or expectant father;
(4) the department; or
(5) the county office of family and children;
the prosecuting attorney shall file a paternity action and represent the child in that action

(b) A prosecuting attorney's office may file a paternity action if the child is:

(1) or is alleged to be, a child in need of services; and
(2) under the supervision of the department or the county office of family and children as the result of a court ordered out-of-home placement.

Filing a paternity action requires establishing paternity, custody, child support and parenting time.

Now let me point out where I think the policy of not representing a parent has problems:

1. Disclosure. Paragraph (a) in the statute says "represent" the child in that action. Not mom, not dad but the child. I doubt any prosecutor's office makes this limitation clear to the parties listed in (a)(2) or (3).
2. More Disclosure. I doubt the prosecutor offices make it clear that they limit their representation after the initial filing. I read action to limit the prosecutor to limit its representation after the paternity determination - which would include custody issues. I have yet to see a prosecutor's office handle a custody fight.

(For why disclosure is such a big deal, give Managing the risk of unbundled legal services a read).

What makes this all confusing is that federal law has now given all prosecutors a child support enforcement function. Child support enforcement follows after the state imposed duties. Whether the prosecutors are putting the child support enforcement before their representation is not something that I have good evidence for one way or another.

It may be that I am altogether wrong on this. Feel free to leave comments.

Happy New Year

Celebrate wisely and may we all hope the coming year is kinder than its predecessor !

Family Law Statistics - What There is and What There is Not

This follows up Indiana Trial Court Statistics in a way. Massachusetts Divorce Lawyer Blog published the post Divorce Statistics in Massachusetts.

The probate and family courts of Massachusetts recently released data of different types of filings from 2005 to 2009.

Several interesting numbers:

Divorce filings in 2005 – 47,130
Divorce filings in 2009 – 53,097

Paternity filings in 2005 – 36,583
Paternity filings in 2009 – 49,754

So it is not just Indiana that lacks any detailed data on what goes on in paternity or divorce cases: how many are dismissed, how many involve children, custody dispositions, the number of modifications, the issues being modified, and so on.

We - that is lawyers and judges - are trained to think of the case before us and not how that case, that client fits within the overall system. The more I write here and the conversations I get into because of this blog, the more I think we should.

Suggestion for Divorcing or Divorced Parents on Twitter

A while back I checked out We Follow and did a search for Tweeters using the word "divorce".  This link should take you to the same results.  (If that does not work, then go here and do the same search as I did).

What I noticed is a lot of support group types.  Do give check them out if you feel the need.

I recognize this as touching on the area where my lawyer skills do meet a need of my clients and so I offer them without making any particular recommendation.

Want to Take the Fight Out of Divorces? Ontario Is.

Recently, I have been writing about Indiana's family law system in general (see Should Indiana Have a Statute Promoting Collaborative Divorce? and Follow up on If You Could Change the Delivery of Legal Services.) and Taking 'combat' out of divorce system from the Toronto Star caught my eye.

Ontario has good ideas - or so I think.

As of that date, every person applying for custody of or access to a child must complete a sworn statement outlining "the facts and circumstances that relate to the child's best interests."

The often thorny matter of money will also be tackled as financial information relating to child support will have to be disclosed annually.

And a parent whose name was left off their child's birth certificate will have the legal right to apply to have their surname added to their child's surname if the court grants a declaration of parentage.

And a parent whose name was left off their child's birth certificate will have the legal right to apply to have their surname added to their child's surname if the court grants a declaration of parentage.

***

To that end, Bentley wants the system to provide more information to families up front about the legal steps they need to take and, more importantly, the impact on children when a relationship breaks down.

He wants the system to better be able to identify straightforward cases that can be resolved quickly and easily to free up resources for more complicated disputes.

As well, Bentley plans to make it easier for families to get legal advice and encourage them to pursue "less adversarial" means of resolving matters, such as mediation.