A father who was taken to court by his 12-year-old daughter after he grounded her in has lost his appeal.
Superior Court rejected the father's appeal of a lower court ruling that said his punishment was too severe for the wrongs he said his daughter committed.
In its ruling the court of appeal declared the girl was caught up in a "very rare" set of circumstances, and her father didn't have sufficient grounds to contest the court's earlier decision.
The family's legal wrangling started with a dispute over the girl's internet use.
She had been living with her father after her parents split up when he grounded her for defying his order to stay off the internet. The father caught her chatting on websites he had blocked, and alleged his daughter was posting "inappropriate pictures" of herself online. Pay attention, she is a 12 year old girl with a caring and concerned father!
Her punishment: she was banned from her Grade 6 graduation trip, for which her mother had already granted permission. (doesn’t live with mother)
The father who had custody, withheld his written permission for the trip, prompting the school to refuse to let the girl go with her classmates.
That's when the girl asked for help from the lawyer who represented her in her parents' separation, and petitioned the court to intervene in her case. (because she was grounded for disobeying her father) (not beaten, not rejected…GROUNDED!)
"Going to court was a last resort," said the attorney who represented the girl. The question was that there was a problem between the father and the mother, and the child asked the court to intervene because it was important to her.
"The trip was very important to her." A 12 year old girl that deserved to be grounded, and a stupid attorney took her case?
The legal battle destroyed father-daughter relationship.
A lower court ruled in the girl's favor. She went on the trip, but her father appealed the decision on the principle of the matter.
The girl who now lives with her mother, (who will let the little brat do whatever she wants) doesn't have much of a relationship with her dad now. (Go figure, that is what happens when the non custodial parent does not support the custodial parent…ever heard of parental alienation, it's the willful rape of a childs mind!)
We went from a child who wanted to live with her father, and after all this has been done, they're not speaking anymore.
I believe the ruling reflects a loss of any morality in the court system.
Is this what we want in our society? Laws are supposed to reflect our values. And if the courts aren't reflecting that, maybe it’s time; we the citizens take back control of the courts from the corrupt Judges and Evil Money Grabbing Attorneys that control them!
In its ruling, the appeal court warned the case should not be seen as an open invitation for children to take legal action every time they're grounded. Really, just what kind of precedent does the court think this ruling sets?
Doesn’t matter, fact is now, the father has no authority over this child anymore. She sued him (a 12 year old kid) because she doesn't respect his rules. It's very hard to raise a child who is the boss.
What have we done…and what are we doing to our children?