Skip to content | Skip to institutional links

Common menu bar links

Institutional links

Supporting Families
Resources
Transparency
- Completed Access to Information Requests
- Proactive Disclosure

The Department of Justice Canada works to reduce family violence in Canada. Learn more...

Grandparent-Grandchild Access: A Legal Analysis

ENDNOTES

[1] 120 S. Ct. 2054 (2000).
[2] Brief Amici Curiae of the American Association of Retired Persons and Generations United, filed November 12, 1999.
[3] Brief Amicus Curiae of the American Center for Law and Justice Supporting Respondent, filed December 10, 1999; Brief Amici Curiae of the Christian Legal Society and The National Association of Evangelicals, filed December 13, 1999.
[4] Brief of the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund and Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders as Amici Curiae, filed December 13, 1999.
[5] Brief Amicus Curiae of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the ACLU of Washington, filed December 13, 1999.
[6] Brief Amicus Curriae of the National Association of Counsel for Children, filed December 13, 1999.
[7] Canada, Report of the Special Joint Committee on Child Custody and Access, For the Sake of the Children, available online at (date accessed, July 30, 2001). www.parl.gc.ca/InfoComDoc/36/1/SJCA /Studies/rap-rep/sjcarp02-e.htm
[8] [2001] O.J. No. 705 (Ont. C.A.).
[9] Wash. Rev. Code § 26.10.160 (3) (Supp.1996).
[10] Troxel was combined with two other similar cases and is cited as Re Custody of Sara Skyanne Smith et al., 137 Wn. 2nd 1 (Wash. 1998).
[11] Ibid at 21.
[12] Ibid.
[13] U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1, cl. 2.
[14] Supra, Note 1 at 2059.
[15] Ibid at 2060.
[16] Ibid.
[17] Ibid. See also, U.S. Supreme Court decisions in Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923); Pierce v. Society of Sisters. 268 U.S. 510 (1925); Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944); Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972).
[18] Ibid.
[19] Ibid.
[20] Ibid at 2061.
[21] 442 U.S. 584 at 602 (1979).
[22] Supra, Note 1 at 2061.
[23] Ibid at 2062.
[24] Ibid.
[25] Ibid at 2064.
[26] Ibid.
[27] (28 March 2000), Ontario 1131/98 (Ont. S.C.J.) [unreported].
[28] Supra, Note 8 at para. 20.
[29] Supra, Note 8 at paras. 21-23.
[30] Art. 611 C.C.Q.
[31] S.N.B. 1980, c. F-2.2.
[32] R.S.A. 1980 c. p-20.
[33] R.S.B.C. 1996, c.128, as am. by S.B.C. 1998, c.28.
[34] R.S.Y. 1986, c.22, as am. by S.Y. 1998, c.4.
[35] R.S.C. 1985, chap. 3.
[36] R.S.O. 1990, chap. C.12.
[37] D. (G.) v. M. (G.) (1999) 47 R.F.L. (4th) 16 at 27 (N.W.T.S.C.).
[38] [1985] O. J. No. 725 at para. 1 (Ont. C.A.) (QL).
[39] (1982) 24 R.F.L. (2d) 342 (Ont. C.A.).
[40] Supra, Note 37 at 27.
[41] (1992) 39 R.F.L. (3d) 163 at 167 (N.S. Fam. Ct.).
[42] (1985) 45 R.F.L. (2d) 337 at 347 (B.C.S.C.).
[43] MacGyver v. Richards (1995) 22 O.R. (3d) 481 at 492 (Ont. C.A.).
[44] Wylde v. Wylde [1984] O.J. No. 764 (Ont. Prov. Ct. Fam. Div.) (QL);
Moreau v. Cody (1995) 15. R.F.L. (4th) 174 (O.C.J. Prov. Div.); and
Paulini v. Schmidt [1993] O.J. No. 2907 (O.C.J. Gen. Div.) (QL).
[45] [1991] O.J. No. 1114 (O.C.J. Prov. Div.) (QL).
[46] Corinne Wilks and Catherine Melville, Grandparents in Custody and Access Disputes (1990) 13 (3): Journal of Divorce, 1 at 3-4.
[47] Carolyn Cogswell and Carolyn S. Henry, Grandchildren’s Perceptions of Grandparental Support in Divorced and Intact Families, (1995) 23 (3/4): Journal of Remarriage and Divorce, 127 at 147.
[48] Supra, Note 1 at 2063.
[49] 828 S.W. (2d) 630 at 631-632 (Ky. 1992).
[50] Ibid at 633.
[51] 420 N.Y.S. 2d 697 (N.Y. Fam. Ct. 1979).
[52] 332 A. 2d 199 at 204-205 (N.J. 1975).
[53] 87 Cal. App 4th 1099 (2001).
[54] Ibid at 1110.
[55] Ibid.
[56] [1996] O.J. No. 755 at Par. 7 (O.C.J. Prov. Div.) (QL).
[57] [2000] A.J. No. 1082 (Alta. Prov. Ct.) (QL).
[58] Anne Marie Jackson, The Coming of Age of Grandparent Visitation Rights,(Winter 1994) 43 Am. U.L. Rev. 563 at 580.
[59] Supra, Note 8 at para. 19.
[60] Ibid at para. 17.
[61] Andre P. Derdeyn, Grandparent Visitation Rights: Rendering Family Dissension More Pronounced? Amer. J. Orthopsychiat. (April 1985) 277 at 282.
[62] Ross A. Thompson, Mario J. Scalora, Susan P. Limber and Lynn Castrianno, Grandparent Visitation Rights: A Psycholegal Analysis, Family and Conciliation Courts Review, January 1991, 29 (1) 9 at 16-17.
[63] Supra, Note 8 at par. 24.
[64] Nicholas Bala and Rebecca Jaremko, "Canada: Non-Marital Unions, Finality of Separation Agreements and Children’s Issues, submitted for publication in Andrew Bainham, ed., The International Survey of Family Law, 2002 (Jordans).
[65] [1996] O.J. No. 2912 at Par. 49 (O.C.J. Prov. Div.) (QL).
[66] (1992) 42 R.F.L. (3d) 281 (N.B.Q.B. Fam. Div.).
[67] (1998) 13 R.F.L. (3d) 201 at 208-209 (Ont. Prov. Ct. Fam. Div.).
[68] (1991) 122 N.B.R. (2d) 271 at 281 (N.B.Q.B. Fam. Div.).
[69] Ibid at 278.
[70] (May 16, 2001), Ontario 8269/00 (Ontario S.C.J.) [unreported].
[71] Ibid at paras. 8 and 9.
[72] Ibid at paras. 10 and 11.
[73] (Sept. 21, 2001) Ontario 59638/01 (Ont. Div. Ct.) [unreported].
[74] (1993) W.D.F.L. 083 (Ont. Ct. Gen. Div.).
[75] [1991] O.J. No. 2446 (Ont. Ct. Prov. Div.) (QL).
[76] [1999] S.J. No. 568 (Sask. U.F.C.) (QL).
[77] [1997] S.C.J. No. 604 (N.S. Fam. Ct.) (QL).
[78] (1996) 23 R.F.L. (4th) 106 (N.B.Q.B. Fam. Div.).
[79] [1998] O.J. No. 1544 (O.C.J. Gen. Div.) (QL).
[80] (1994) 7 R.F.L. (4th) 391 (O.C.J. Gen. Div.).
[81] [1988] O.J. No. 2438 (Ont. Ct. Prov. Div.) (QL).
[82] [1999] C.C.L. 5070 (S.C.J.).
[83] [1998] B.C.J. No. 961 (B.C.S.C.) (QL).
[84] Morecraft v. Morecraft (1991) 122 N.B.R. (2d) 271 (N.B.Q.B. Fam. Div.); and
Parham v. J.R. et al., 442 U.S. 584 (1979).
[85] [1984] O.J. No. 764 (Ont. Prov. Ct. Fam. Div.) (QL).
[86] (1998) 31 R.F.L. (4th) 351 (N.S. Fam. Ct.).
[87] (1997) 23 R.F.L. (4th) 441 (N.B.Q.B. Fam. Div.).
[88] (1995) 163 N.B.R. (2d) 323 (N.B.Q.B. Fam. Div.).
[89] (1984) 34 Man. R. (2d) 158 (Man. C.A.).
[90] [1982] O.J. No. 595 (Ont. Prov. Ct. Fam. Div.) (QL).
[91] [1992] B.C.J. No. 1118 (B.C.S.C.) (QL).
[92] (1993) 49 R.F.L. (3d) 437 at 440-441 (B.C.C.A.).
[93] W. (C.G.) v. J. (M.) (1982) 24 R.F.L. (2d) 342 (Ont. C.A.); Vormittag v. Vormittag, [1984] O.J. No. 760 (Ont. Prov. Ct. Fam. Div.) (QL); D. (G.) v. M. (G.) (1999) 47 R.F.L. (4th) 16 (N.W.T.S.C.).
[94] Supra, Note 81.
[95] Supra, Note 61 at 285.
[96] Ibid at 278.
[97] Supra, Note 80.
[98] Supra, Note 68 at 278.
[99] (1986) 2 R.F.L. (3d) 414 at 415- 416 (Man. C.A.).
[100] Supra, Note 87 at 446.
[101] [1995] O.J. No. 425 at para. 19 (O.C.J. Prov. Div.).
[102] Kathleen S. Bean, Grandparent Visitation: Can the Parent Refuse? U. Louiseville J. Fam. L. 24 393 at 435-436.
[103] 855 S.W. (2d) 573 at 580 (Tenn. 1993).
[104] Supra, Note 102 at 441.
[105] Supra, Note 10 at 20.
[106] Joan Catherine Bohl, Grandparent Visitation Law Grows Up: The Trend Toward Awarding Visitation Only When the Child Would Otherwise Suffer Harm, 48 (2000) Drake L. Rev. 279 at 315.
[107] Supra, Note 68 at 278.
[108] (1991) 31 R.F.L. (3d) 48 at 52 (N. S. Fam. Ct.).
[109] Supra, Note 8 at para. 22.
[110] (1997) 35 R.F.L. (4th) 122 at 130 (O.C.J. Prov. Div.).
[111] [1998] O.J. No. 2998 at para. 15 (O.C.J. Prov. Div.) (QL).
[112] Supra, Note 86 at 376-377.
[113] (1995) 173 A.R. 369 (Alta. Q.B.).
[114] (1995) 20 R.F.L. (4th) 115 at 121 (Alta. C.A.).
[115] Supra, Note 102 at 441.
[116] 104 Cal. App. 3d 992 at 996 (1980).
[117] Supra, Note 102 at 441-442.
[118] 356 N.E. 2d 277 at 281 (N.Y. App. 1976).
[119] Supra, Note 103.
[120] Supra, Note 10 at 29.
[121] Supra,Note 1 at 2064.
[122] (1992) 124 N.S.R. (2d) 273 at 274; 345 A.P.R. 273 at 274 (N.S. Fam. Ct.).
[123] (1993) 138 N.B.R. (2d) at 330 (N.B.Q.B.).
[124] (1996) 19 R.F.L. (4th) 177 (S.C.C.).
[125] (1990) 30 R.F.L. (3d) 53 at 63 (Ont. C.A.).
[126] (1999) 49 R.F.L. (4th) 250 (B.C.C.A.).
[127] Supra, Note 85 at para. 39.
[128] Supra, Note 87 at 446.
[129] James G. McLeod & Alfred A. Mamo (1999, Carswell) Annual Review of Family Law at 46.
[130] Supra, Note 86 at 374-375.
[131] (1991) 105 N.S.R. (2d) 9, 284 A.P.R. 9 (N.S. Fam. Ct.).
[132] Supra, Note 1 at 2062.
[133] Supra, Note 102 at 446.
[134] Supra, Note 86 at 377.
[135] Supra, Note 62 at 22.
[136] Ligate v. Richardson (1997), 34 O.R. (3d) 423 (Ont. C.A.).
[137] Dhaliwal v. Beloud, (1998) 38 R.F.L. (4th) 345 (B.C.C.A.).
[138] Supra, Note 62 at 20.
[139] Supra, Note 1 at 2065.
[140] Ibid at 2079.
[141] Wynn Legal Defense Fund at http://www.parentsrights.org/troxel/wynnlet.html (Accessed November 1, 2000, and October 14, 2001. This link no longer works.).
[142] Supra, Note 85 at paras. 56-58.
[143] (1997) 31 R.F.L. (4th) 440 at 445 (O.C.J. Prov. Div.).
[144] Supra, Note 32.
[145] Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (U.K.) 1982, c.11.
[146] (1993) 108 D.L.R. (4th) 193 (S.C.C.).
[147] (1993) 49 R.F.L. (3d) 317 (S.C.C.).
[148] Supra, Note 145 at 273.
[149] Ibid at 263.
[150] Ibid.
[151] (1994) 9 R.F.L. (4th) 157 (S.C.C.).
[152] Ibid at 201.
[153] Ibid at 204 -207.
[154] (1990) 50 R.F.L. (4th) 63.
[155] Ibid at 104-105.
[156] [2000] S.C.J. No. 48 at paras. 11 & 12 (S.C.C.) (QL).
[157] [1986] 2 S.C.R. 573.
[158] Supra, Note 150 at 208.
[159] Supra, Note 126 at 253.
[160] Nicholas Bala, The Charter of Rights and Family Law in Canada: A New Era, C.F.L.Q. 18 (2000-2001) 373 at 423.
[161] Ibid.
[162] Supra, Note 124.
[163] Supra, Note 159 at 426-427.
[164] Supra, Note 124.
[165] Supra, Note 102 at 430.
[166] Supra, Note 103.
[167] Supra, Note 10.
[168] Supra, Note 111.
[169] Supra, Note 113.
[170] Supra, Note 1 at 2059.
[171] 126 N.H. 388 at 391-392 (1985).
[172] Supra , Note 106 at 296 and 331.
[173] 29 S.W. (3d) 199 at 204 (Tex. App.-Beaumont 2000).
[174] 85 Cal. App. (4th) 848 (2000).
[175] Ibid at 863.
[176] Supra, Note 85 at paras. 45-47.
[177] Supra, Note 62 at 17-18.
[178] Supra, Note 7.
[179] Sherry Colb, King Solomon in the 21st Century, online: Findlaw King Solomon in the 21st Century (accessed November 1, 2000).
[180] Supra, Note 62 at 23.

Common menu bar links

Breadcrumb trail

Institutional links

Supporting Families

Resources

Transparency

Grandparent-Grandchild Access: A Legal Analysis

ENDNOTES