Law · Legal Information · Justice
 

Joyce Model of Joint Guardianship

A British Columbia model of joint guardianship in respect to children as between separated parents.

A model of joint guardianship or governance of children in the event of separated parents, created by Brian Joyce, then a magistrate ("Master") of the Supreme Court of British Colombia (since 2001, he is a full justice of the Court).

The model was quickly and universally embraced by the family law bar and bench and has become the most favored model of guardianship used by Supreme Court  of British Colombia and the lower jurisdiction Provincial Court of British Colombia.

Justice Joyce used the model as early as 1997 in Mills v Mills, 1997 BCJ 1117

Joyce text box Combined with a variety of custody provisions, such as sole custody or joint custody, the model provides the parents with a dynamic process for both consultation and dispute resolution in regards to their children.

Up to the publication of the Joyce model, parents, lawyers and the courts struggled with a workable, ground-level custody and guardianship governance model.

Here is the model in skeleton form, with adjustments to be made on points of detail.

Parent #1 and Parent #2 shall have joint guardianship of the child[ren]. Joint guardianship means:
(a)    The parents are to be joint guardians of the estate[s] of the child[ren];

(b)    in the event of the death of either parent, the remaining parent will be the sole guardian of the person[s] of the child[ren];

(c)    Parent #1, who has the primary responsibility for the day-to-day care of the child[ren], will have the obligation to advise Parent #2 of any matters of a significant nature affecting the child[ren];

(d)    Parent #1 will have the obligation to discuss with Parent #2 any significant decisions which have to be made with respect to the child[ren], including significant decisions concerning the health (except emergency decisions), education, religious instruction, and general welfare of the child[ren], and Parent #2 will have the obligation to discuss these issues with Parent #1, and each parent will have the obligation to try to reach agreement with respect to those major decisions;

(e)    in the event that the parents cannot reach agreement with respect to any major decision despite their best efforts, Parent #1 will have the right to make such decision, and Parent #2 will have the right, under section 32 of the Family Relations Act, to seek a review of any decision which that parent considers contrary to the best interests of the child[ren];

(f)    each parent will have the right to obtain information concerning the child[ren] directly from third parties, including teachers, counsellors, medical professionals, and third-party caregivers.

 


Are we missing anything? If you think there is a term that should be included, please send us the suggestion

  • Dictionary
  • Resources
  • LawMag

Latest LagMag headlines:

H1N1 Law - Swine Law for a Swine Flu

In a state of public health law anarchy, professional hockey players receive a killer flu vaccine while infants and pregnant women wait.

The Death of the Common Law: Expiry date, 2100

Just about now, but for the economic might of the United States of America, the last funeral bell tolls of the common law would be fading.

Gretzky Law

The recent Phoenix Coyotes debacle, in which he left behind his job, is not the only time Wayne Gretzky has had to leave from the side exit of a courtroom.


Read earlier headlines »
Subscribe to stay in touch »

Unless otherwise noted, this article was written by Lloyd Duhaime, Barrister, Solicitor, Attorney and Lawyer (and Notary Public!). It is not intended to be legal advice and you would be foolhardy to rely on it in respect to any specific situation you or an acquaintance may be facing. In addition, the law changes rapidly and sometimes with little notice so from time to time, an article may not be up to date. Therefore, this is merely legal information designed to educate the reader. If you have a real situation, this information will serve as a good springboard to get legal advice from a lawyer.

top