Accordingly, as noted, when a non-parental third party like Mr. [G.E.S.] seeks access, he or she must clearly and convincingly demonstrate why ongoing contact is in the best interests of the child. In considering that matter, a court should be slow to take issue with a fit and capable custodial parent’s view that access is not appropriate. See: Cyrenne v. Moar, supra at para. 57. This does not mean that the court must ignore the basis or rationale of the custodial parent’s opposition to access and proceed in a posture of complete deference to that parent’s views. It means only that the position of the custodial parent should be given very substantial weight and careful consideration in determining the best interests of the child.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.