Law Times

PAGE 10 FOCUS February 13, 2012 • Law Times Family law group wants boost for children's lawyer BY MICHAEL McKIERNAN Law Times for the province's overwhelmed Office of the Children's Lawyer. T he Family Lawyers Association of Ontario wants to see a funding boost and procedural reform The move comes as Ontario Auditor General Jim McCarter singled out the office in his annu- al report over concerns with the number of cases it turns down, the time it takes to issue decisions and reports, uneven coverage across the province, and the cost- effectiveness of its operations. "It's going to be a big issue for us this year," says Victoria Starr, chairwoman of the association. "We're going to be focusing on working with the [office] to help them improve their process. When the [office] talks in court, it has huge persuasive power over the parties and over the judge. I think we really need to invest in it for the sake of children and give it the resources it needs to con- duct thorough investiga- tions and produce high- quality reports because their work is being so heavily relied upon in court." The auditor general's PORTABLE ACCESS TO SPOUSAL SUPPORT ADVISORY GUIDELINES SPOUSAL SUPPORT IN CANADA ANN WILTON, NOEL SEMPLE AND MacDONALD AND PARTNERS, LLP Get quick access to Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines (SSAG) when you are in court litigating a case, visiting clients or researching. Spousal Support in Canada provides you with a portable quick reference on how the courts presently determine spousal support. Derived from the authoritative Volume 3 of Canadian Divorce Law and Practice, this resource is a convenient way to access the information you need when you are on the go. ORDER # 983703-65199 $99 Softcover 320 pages July 2011 978-0-7798-3703-8 You'll find expertly written commentary on spousal support under the Divorce Act and the SSAG, including a discussion of trends and cases. The full-text of relevant legislation and the entire text of the SSAG are included in the appendix. AVAILABLE RISK-FREE FOR 30 DAYS Order online at www.carswell.com Call Toll-Free: 1-800-387-5164 In Toronto: 416-609-3800 Shipping and handling are extra. Price subject to change without notice and subject to applicable taxes. report acknowledged the value justice players place on the work of the office, which spent about $32 million in the 2010-11 fis- cal year. "However, these servic- es are often not assigned or delivered in a timely enough manner," the report noted. "I feel bad for them," says Toronto family law- yer Robert Shawyer, who also sits on the association's board of directors. "With so many peo- ple getting divorced or involved in some type of family law dispute, the office hasn't been funded to the level it needs to keep up with the amount of work that keeps getting submitted to them." One concern highlighted Concerns with the Office of the Children's Lawyer are 'going to be a big issue for us this year,' says Victoria Starr. particularly significant in custody and access cases because the cur- rent arrangements for the child are a factor the judge must con- sider in making a decision. "The more time passes, the more the status quo sets in, and that makes it difficult by the auditor general was the amount of time the office takes to accept or reject custody and access cases referred to it by the court. Last year, it took it 39 days on average to deliver its decision. That was a big improvement on the previous year's 68-day average but still way off the office's 21-day turnaround target. "The case comes to a stand- still from a process perspective because everybody needs to know if the [office] will get involved," says Starr. Shawyer says the delays are for the courts to deal with the issue," he says. "The longer the child is situ- ated with one parent or the other, the harder it is for the court to turn around and uproot the child and possibly disrupt their life in a negative fashion." Last year, the office declined to act in about 40 per cent of the access cases referred to it by the court. The average refusal rate for the last per cent. Wild regional variations meant applicants five years stands at 44 from eastern Ontario were much less likely to be unsuccessful with a 29-per- cent refusal rate. That compares with a 50-per-cent rate in north- ern Ontario. According to the auditor gen- eral, the office makes its decisions, which are based on 13 refusal cri- teria, without adequately assess- ing "the impact of these refusals on the children and the court." The report recommended that the office reverse its thinking and instead establish criteria for accepting cases "based on the best interests of the children involved and the benefits provided by the office's involvement." Family lawyer Andrew Feldstein of Markham, Ont., hopes the new criteria will give lawyers and judges a better sense of which cases the office is most lik ely to accept. Right now, he says assessing the chances of success is like a stab in the dark. "Forty-four per cent are get- ting rejected and nobody really knows why. I think it makes more sense to have reasons to explain to a judge why your case should make the grade. It'll also help the judiciary as gatekeepers because if they can see a case is not appropri- ate, then the parties aren't going to go and spend all that money and time preparing the intake forms and the [office] isn't going to have to read them and reject them." One explanation for the office's reluctance to explain its rejections may be that one of the most com- mon reasons isn't even among the See Association's, page 11 Untitled-1 1 www.lawtimesnews.com 12-02-07 12:50 PM

• Cover