What is the "third option" in the context of a child protection application?

As noted above, the “third option” arises out of the decision of Berry v. Berry, wherein Juriansz J.A. held that the trial judge had erred in failing to consider the option of the child remaining in the original locale with the mother who had proposed the move; the mother had testified that if she could not move with the child, she would remain in Toronto. He stated, at paragraph 24 of the decision, that: It was an error of fact because the trial judge's finding that the mother permanently moved to Kingston was contrary to the evidence. The mother stated clearly in her evidence in chief that if the court refused her application she would live in Toronto.