Found Safe Canada - O’Driscoll-Zak sisters, 2 & 5, abduction by aunt & grandmother, Cochrane, 12 Mar 2021

[grannygates]

I dont get what the end game is here. What I am reading is that the mother was interfering with the fathers parenting time so the judge awarded the children to live with the father. So the maternal family abducts the children and what now? Hide forever?

 

[rkendmar]

The courts aren't dysfunctional. When one parent refuses to abide by court orders, she doesn't go to jail. Mediation and other family support services, including a psychologist, were made available. The mother refused to participate.

RCMP have said that they believe the children are in the country and that the abductors are aided by others who think they are protecting the children. It is impossible to leave the country without a paper trail during covid. Everyone passing through the border will be checked.

Furthermore, the children were last seen at their rural home near Cochrane at 9:30AM. Court starts at 10:00AM. When the father went to the rural home to collect the children, they were gone. There would have been an immediate alert to all borders across the country.

The courts are dysfunctional if a judge can order a parent, who two very young children haven't seen in months, to have full custody immediately.
The judge certainly knew the effect this would have on these two girls.
I can only assume the judge was angry with the mother and gave custody to the father to punish her (the mother) for not going along with the program.
I am left wondering if there are no therapeutic services available for family reconciliation?

 

[MistyWaters]

The courts are dysfunctional if a judge can order a parent, who two very young children haven't seen in months, to have full custody immediately.
The judge certainly knew the effect this would have on these two girls.
I can only assume the judge was angry with the mother and gave custody to the father to punish her (the mother) for not going along with the program.
I am left wondering if there are no therapeutic services available for family reconciliation?

I suppose the alternative for the Judge would’ve been to involve Child Protective Service and remove the children entirely, with placement in foster care until the two parents came to some sort of parenting resolution. But would’ve that prevented the abduction, probably not.

The way I see it the Judge was caught between a rock and a hard place due to the mother’s refusal to adhere to prior court orders including the existing custody order which had expired. She’d already been found in contempt for breaching two previous parenting orders.

But who could’ve anticipated the children would be abducted by her mother and sister? That’s an extraordinarily irrational action IMO and the judge can’t be blamed for that.

 

[otto]

The courts are dysfunctional if a judge can order a parent, who two very young children haven't seen in months, to have full custody immediately.
The judge certainly knew the effect this would have on these two girls.
I can only assume the judge was angry with the mother and gave custody to the father to punish her (the mother) for not going along with the program.
I am left wondering if there are no therapeutic services available for family reconciliation?

We don't know how often the father has seen his children since Dec 2020.

Judges don't punish parents. They listen to evidence, weigh that evidence within the confines of law, and make a ruling. We know that the mother violated court orders and acted as though the law does not apply to her. Her mother and sister have demonstrated that they believe the law does not apply to them. That has caused serious problems for the mother and her family, as well as two young children.

There are many services in place for divorcing couples:

Family Law Dispute Resolution Services

Family Mediation

 

[YaYa_521]

Absolutely! The courts take the view that it takes two to tango, that both have made mistakes, but they both need to come to the table to sort out the mess.

It's possible that there was an interim decision that the mother would have temporary custody, or that it was joint custody with the mother having day to day care of the children. If the father made an application for 50% care of the children, that could result in termination of child support payments, and the children constantly going back and forth between two homes. If the parents do not currently live in the same town, that means a big mess regarding schooling, friends and a stable environment for the children. Parents lose rights when they divorce because the best interests of the children trumps their personal interests.

Regardless, the courts believe that it is important for children to have access to both parents, even if the parents are not perfect, and the belief is that although a parent may treat a spouse poorly, that does not mean they treat the children poorly.

Great post!

 

[MistyWaters]

Alienation is an accepted theory in Alta courts.

Yes, not just Alta courts. I can’t imagine anyone, anywhere involved in Child Custody issues regarding parental alienation as an insignificant, unproven theory.

The Impact of Parental Alienation on Children
“What children of divorce most want and need is to maintain healthy and strong relationships with both of their parents, and to be shielded from their parents' conflicts. Some parents, however, in an effort to bolster their parental identity, create an expectation that children choose sides. In more extreme situations, they foster the child’s rejection of the other parent. In the most extreme cases, children are manipulated by one parent to hate the other, despite children’s innate desire to love and be loved by both parents.”

 

[rkendmar]

I suppose the alternative for the Judge would’ve been to involve Child Protective Service and remove the children entirely, with placement in foster care until the two parents came to some sort of parenting resolution. But would’ve that prevented the abduction, probably not.

The way I see it the Judge was caught between a rock and a hard place due to the mother’s refusal to adhere to prior court orders including the existing custody order which had expired. She’d already been found in contempt for breaching two previous parenting orders.

But who could’ve anticipated the children would be abducted by her mother and sister? That’s an extraordinarily irrational action IMO and the judge can’t be blamed for that.

How was it helpful to take two very young children and order that full custody be immediately changed to their father, who reportedly they had not seen since August 2020?
Is this in the children's best interests?

 

[Mystrywrtr62]

How was it helpful to take two very young children and order that full custody be immediately changed to their father, who reportedly they had not seen since August 2020?
Is this in the children's best interests?

Mother was in contempt of two previous orders. Do you reward the mother for alienation? It is in the child’s best interests to have relationship with both parents. Mother is trying to prevent that.

 

[goinganywhere]

How was it helpful to take two very young children and order that full custody be immediately changed to their father, who reportedly they had not seen since August 2020?
Is this in the children's best interests?

Well, yeah. When mom lost custody would you prefer they went into foster care?

 

[otto]

How was it helpful to take two very young children and order that full custody be immediately changed to their father, who reportedly they had not seen since August 2020?
Is this in the children's best interests?

We don't know when the children last saw their father. We know that the children know and presumably love their father. We know that parents cannot be rewarded for refusing contact between their children and the other parent.

Given the choices - where the children can go to their father or mother, and the mother is interfering with best interests of the child, what would be the solution?

 

[Seattle1]

I suppose the alternative for the Judge would’ve been to involve Child Protective Service and remove the children entirely, with placement in foster care until the two parents came to some sort of parenting resolution. But would’ve that prevented the abduction, probably not.

The way I see it the Judge was caught between a rock and a hard place due to the mother’s refusal to adhere to prior court orders including the existing custody order which had expired. She’d already been found in contempt for breaching two previous parenting orders.

But who could’ve anticipated the children would be abducted by her mother and sister? That’s an extraordinarily irrational action IMO and the judge can’t be blamed for that.

The innocent children are paying the price for poor decisions by the parents and extended family.

To be clear, the Court does not make decisions for child placement based on one judge's emotions such as being angry at the mother, or award custody to the father to punish the mother, -- that's a ridiculous notion. Please see Family Law Act and Divorce Act linked below.

The Court makes decisions based on judicial law. In this case, the mother never gave the decision by the Court a chance. There was no opportunity to put the plan in motion because the mother was determined not to let it happen, period.

https://www.cplea.ca/wp-content/uploads/FamilyLawInAlberta.pdf

 

[rkendmar]

We don't know when the children last saw their father. We know that the children know and presumably love their father. We know that parents cannot be rewarded for refusing contact between their children and the other parent.

Given the choices - where the children can go to their father or mother, and the mother is interfering with best interests of the child, what would be the solution?

If the children were older (8, 9+), I would tend to agree.
The children are very young and transitions/disruptions in their lives are difficult.
IMO, the parents need to work individually with therapists experienced in child development and put together a visitation calendar.
It may not be possible at this time for the parents to personally handle transitions at the beginnings and ends of visitation, a neutral third party may be needed.
It may not be possible for the parents, at this time, to 'co-parent' and make decisions together, each parent may need to make decisions for the rules in their house only.
JMO but the mother and father need to be the primaries and additional helpful friends and family should be discouraged from becoming too involved in the process.

This is just my opinion. My professional experience is in the medical not the legal field.

 

[MistyWaters]

How was it helpful to take two very young children and order that full custody be immediately changed to their father, who reportedly they had not seen since August 2020?
Is this in the children's best interests?

This wasn’t a case of a dead-beat dad arising from the woodwork. According to the documents posted on Canlii the father was prevented from having access to his children. There’s no reason his parental rights should be stricken due to his ex-spouse’s inappropriate behaviour.

Courts consider placement with a parent to be in the child’s best interest, as opposed to foster care. Considering the children are now missing, it appears the mother and/or her family believe they continue to have the right to interfere with the father’s custody. It’s a very sad situation all around, the children caught in the middle. JMO

https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc/2021/2021abqb80/2021abqb80.html?resultIndex=7
The mother’s bias application included the bolded portion of the following paragraphs from the transcript of my oral reasons. I have included the full paragraphs to provide a bit more context for these comments:

Furthermore, what is clear from the evidence is that Colin is trying to have parenting time with the Children and his time is being interfered with to the extreme as earlier outlined. The parties both admit that the Children have been traumatized by recent events that occurred while Colin was attempting to access his parenting time. However, I find that Jacqueline has significantly contributed to this trauma. I would even say she ignited it, and now it is aflame.

To ensure the greatest possible protection of the Children's physical, psychological and emotional safety and considering their needs and circumstances, they need to be reunified with their father, and their mother needs to stop her obstructive, intrusive poisonous behaviour.

 

[rkendmar]

This wasn’t a case of a dead-beat dad arising from the woodwork. According to the documents posted on Canlii the father was prevented from having access to his children. There’s no reason his parental rights should be stricken due to his ex-spouse’s inappropriate behaviour.

Courts consider placement with a parent to be in the child’s best interest, as opposed to foster care. Considering the children are now missing, it appears the mother and/or her family believe they continue to have the right to interfere with the father’s custody. It’s a very sad situation all around, the children caught in the middle. JMO

https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc/2021/2021abqb80/2021abqb80.html?resultIndex=7
The mother’s bias application included the bolded portion of the following paragraphs from the transcript of my oral reasons. I have included the full paragraphs to provide a bit more context for these comments:

Furthermore, what is clear from the evidence is that Colin is trying to have parenting time with the Children and his time is being interfered with to the extreme as earlier outlined. The parties both admit that the Children have been traumatized by recent events that occurred while Colin was attempting to access his parenting time. However, I find that Jacqueline has significantly contributed to this trauma. I would even say she ignited it, and now it is aflame.

To ensure the greatest possible protection of the Children's physical, psychological and emotional safety and considering their needs and circumstances, they need to be reunified with their father, and their mother needs to stop her obstructive, intrusive poisonous behaviour.

1) Yes, parents have rights but they are superseded by the best interests of the child.

2) I have no idea what specific behaviors the judge is referencing in the above paragraphs.
"being interfered with" = What exactly does this mean?
"traumatized by recent events" = ???
"obstructive, intrusive poisonous behavior" = ???

IMO this judge sounds very emotionally involved in this case, she appears to have lost her 'professional distance'.
Just my opinion.

 

[otto]

If the children were older (8, 9+), I would tend to agree.
The children are very young and transitions/disruptions in their lives are difficult.
IMO, the parents need to work individually with therapists experienced in child development and put together a visitation calendar.
It may not be possible at this time for the parents to personally handle transitions at the beginnings and ends of visitation, a neutral third party may be needed.
It may not be possible for the parents, at this time, to 'co-parent' and make decisions together, each parent may need to make decisions for the rules in their house only.
JMO but the mother and father need to be the primaries and additional helpful friends and family should be discouraged from becoming too involved in the process.

This is just my opinion. My professional experience is in the medical not the legal field.

That is exactly what the courts tried to do, but the mother did not cooperate.

The children have two parents who love them. There is no reason that they should be with the mother rather than the father per the court documents that are available. They should be with both parents in separate homes, but the mother refused.

The children survived the disruption of being deprived of their father - that was the mother's decision. We hope the children survive being deprived of both parents - that seems to be the mother's relatives' decision.

I don't agree with claims that, because the mother deprived the children of contact with their father, they need to transition to spend time with their father. Would people say that if the father had deprived the children of time with their mother? Of course not. People would say that it is their mother, of course they can live with her without a transition period. Why is it any different for a father?

 

[rkendmar]

That is exactly what the courts tried to do, but the mother did not cooperate.

The children have two parents who love them. There is no reason that they should be with the mother rather than the father per the court documents that are available. They should be with both parents in separate homes, but the mother refused.

The children survived the disruption of being deprived of their father - that was the mother's decision. We hope the children survive being deprived of both parents - that seems to be the mother's relatives' decision.

I don't agree with claims that, because the mother deprived the children of contact with their father, they need to transition to spend time with their father. Would people say that if the father had deprived the children of time with their mother? Of course not. People would say that it is their mother, of course they can live with her without a transition period. Why is it any different for a father?

I understand your point and I would agree IF the children were older.
They are very young and, if I understand correctly, the mother has been the primary caregiver.
This has been going on since 2019.
IMO, it will get better once the children get older and once the world opens up again.

 

[Mystrywrtr62]

1) Yes, parents have rights but they are superseded by the best interests of the child.

2) I have no idea what specific behaviors the judge is referencing in the above paragraphs.
"being interfered with" = What exactly does this mean?
"traumatized by recent events" = ???
"obstructive, intrusive poisonous behavior" = ???

IMO this judge sounds very emotionally involved in this case, she appears to have lost her 'professional distance'.
Just my opinion.

I totally disagree. She has based her decision on evidence and the Court of Appeal found there was a basis for her decision. They didn’t share that but they don’t have to.

 

[MistyWaters]

1) Yes, parents have rights but they are superseded by the best interests of the child.

2) I have no idea what specific behaviors the judge is referencing in the above paragraphs.
"being interfered with" = What exactly does this mean?
"traumatized by recent events" = ???
"obstructive, intrusive poisonous behavior" = ???

IMO this judge sounds very emotionally involved in this case, she appears to have lost her 'professional distance'.
Just my opinion.

The specific incidents are not public record nor should they be. The Judge vaguely referenced them in denying the motion to disqualify her, filed by the mother. I think it’s impossible for us to accurately judge the judge’s decision and it doesn’t matter anyway as we can’t overrule the decisions. But what we do know is events eventually collimated in the grandmother and aunt abducting the children when custody was awarded to the father.

The reason I quoted that section was to illustrate the father was prevented from access - he was not negligent, in response to your prior post. Why wouldn’t he satisfy what’s in the children’s best interest.....if he were given the opportunity.

The immediate concern is where are the children?

 

[Seattle1]

News video at link.

'Please bring them home': Father gives tearful plea for help to find daughters missing since Friday

March 15, 2021

Colin Zak is desperate to find his missing daughters, five-year old Leonine O'Driscoll-Zak and two-year-old Wyatt O'Driscoll-Zak, who were last seen Friday morning at their mom's home near Cochrane.

“I’m just so worried about my children,” said Zak.

[..]

Court documents describe a "high-conflict parenting dispute" following the couple's separation in 2019.

Their father says the court ordered full custody of the kids to him on Friday but the girls were not returned.

“We thought we were finally going to get my children out of there,” said Zak.

“To find that they’re nowhere to be found, it’s devastating.”

The mother and sister of his ex are now suspected of taking Leo and Wyatt.

[..]

CTV had not spoken with the girls' mother, but their father said he got a call from RCMP saying they have interviewed mom, who says she doesn't know where the girls are.

 

[Seattle1]

Cochrane RCMP update investigation into search for missing children and adults - DiscoverAirdrie.com

March 20, 2021

The Serious Crimes Branch of the RCMP continue to investigate the disappearance of 5-year-old Leonine O’Driscoll-Zak and 2-year-old Wyatt O’Driscoll-Zak and still believe they are in the company of their grandmother and aunt who are believed to have taken them.

Investigators believe the four have not left Canada. The children, along with their grandmother, 68-year-old Theresa O'Driscoll, and aunt, 38-year-old Alison O'Driscoll are all from the Cochrane area. They were last seen at around 9:30 am Friday, March 12th at the children's rural home near Cochrane.

The two children were supposed to be picked up that day by their father, Colin Zak who was awarded full custody of his daughters. Zak said when he went to get the kids from the home they weren't there.