Episode Details

Ontario appoints and pays for a child to have their own lawyer in a custody case, through an office set up for exactly that. Lisa points out that the closest American equivalent normally runs families somewhere between ten and twenty-three thousand dollars, and often changes very little. That gap is where this conversation starts.

This episode has two guests. David Morneau is an Ontario lawyer who spent fifteen years on the province's panel of children's lawyers, representing children directly in child protection and custody proceedings, and describes it as work he found genuinely gratifying. Sean Valentine practices with him and works with self-represented parents, and has appeared on the show before. Both have taken training on coercive control and intimate partner violence, and both are candid about what they used to miss in clients who presented as composed, or as difficult.

David explains what the job involved: interviewing both parents, reviewing the records, and then getting on the floor with a child who had no interest in talking to a lawyer. He assessed three things in what they told him, the strength of it, its independence, and its consistency across meetings, which is why one interview was never enough. He describes children as young as three and four articulating exactly what they wanted, and a teenager whose account reversed so sharply between sessions that he went back to court and asked to be taken off the file.

Sean and David then turn to reform. Changes to Canadian legislation that finally defined family violence, the push behind Keira's Law to require judicial education, and why they think pressure from informed self-represented parents may move things faster than pressure from inside the profession. They walk through J.N. v. C.G., 2022 ONSC 1198, where a self-represented mother prevailed because she brought evidence while the represented father brought attacks on her character, and Justice Pazaratz said so in the ruling. They close on preconceived bias, opposing counsel who bully, and where to find the research on family violence and alienation.

As always, this is strategic education, not legal or mental-health advice for your specific situation.

🎓 What you'll learn

• What the UN Convention requires a court to do with a child's views and preferences
• The two routes a child's position can reach a judge, and what each one delivers
• Why the same appointment is publicly funded in Ontario and expensive in the US
• Strength, independence, consistency: how a professional weighs what a child says
• Why one interview is never enough, and how rapport gets built with a young child
• What a judge can find when a child's account reverses between meetings
• Why a self-represented parent who brings evidence can out-argue a represented one
• The preconceived bias self-represented parents walk into, and how to work around it

⏱️ Chapters
0:00 Intro
1:00 Representing children in court for fifteen years
5:00 Why one schedule rarely fits every child in a family
8:00 How a child's voice reaches an Ontario courtroom, and what it costs in the US
14:00 Families in transition, and keeping kids out of the conflict
20:00 Canada's family violence definition, and Keira's Law
26:00 Changing the system from inside, or building something beside it
32:00 The vaccination case a self-represented mother won on evidence
44:00 Strength, independence, consistency: assessing a young child
47:00 The teenager whose story changed, and why David withdrew
51:00 Preconceived bias, bully lawyers, and the drama triangle
59:00 Alienation, family violence, and where to find the research

Keep going 💜
Book a free 30-minute discovery call and we'll help you map your next steps: https://beentheregotout.com/call
📘 Been There Got Out: Toxic Relationships, High-Conf