Site Header
Home Information Gathering FAQ / Details Case Index Services Contact

About This Project

TESTING ONLY -- CONTENT IS NOT ACCURATE -- GENERATED BY AI
CONTAINS MANY ERRORS

Parenting Coordination was developed in British Columbia to help high-conflict families resolve disputes outside of court, reduce stress on children, and ensure timely decisions in day-to-day parenting matters. Most Parenting Coordinators (PCs) carry out their work with professionalism, neutrality, and a deep commitment to the best interests of the child.

However, the system is not without challenges. This page tracks publicly available cases where Parenting Coordination outcomes — or the conduct of appointed PCs — were questioned, reviewed, reversed, or resulted in unintended consequences. Issues recorded in these cases include procedural fairness, cost, scope of authority, and transparency.

While these cases represent only a fraction of Parenting Coordination in BC, their impact on families, children, and precedent is significant. This project does not aim to indict the profession — it aims to inform policy discussion, highlight safeguards, and support a balance between authority, accountability, and family well-being.

All information is drawn directly from published CanLII court decisions. The inclusion of “bias” indicators or failed determinations reflects only what is found in judicial records. The mere existence or non-existence of a non-upheld ruling, or an allegation of bias, reflects only a portion of any professional’s work and says little without context. A full picture would require an assessment of overall caseload, including successful and unreported outcomes, which are not captured here.

While individual PCs are named where relevant, the number of families they have served and the many successful, unreported outcomes are not shown. No judgment or opinion is expressed about any individual. This project is intended solely for historical, informational, and legal research purposes.

START OF FILE!
Case Name Year Province Case Number Expert Outcome Summary Determination Upheld? Within Scope? Expert Retained? Parent Complaint Noted Comments
S.M.M. v. J.P.H. 2011 BC 287 Patricia Lane Dr. Elterman reappointed with strict communication restrictions; scope and report deadlines set ❌ No ❌ No Father alleged bias from s.15 expert; improper familiarity and undisclosed communications Private letters sent to psychologist; unequal document sharing; attempts to influence report contents; trial delay concerns
D.N.L. v. C.N.S. 2011 BC 1535 Patricia Lane Access gradually restored with judicial oversight; PC process terminated by consent ❌ No ❌ No Father alleged bias, unequal alcohol standards, mother controlling transitions PC placed child in decision-making role; email-based coordination; inconsistent alcohol standards; process ended after conflict
D.N.L. v. C.N.S. 2013 BC 809 Patricia Lane Thursday overnights eliminated; Friday overnights continued; long summer access added ❌ No ❌ No Father alleged bias; PC and therapist reinforced mother-aligned narratives Child used as informant; father framed as unsafe; PC model sustained child’s anxiety; unequal behavioural standards
M.H. v. C.S. 2013 BC 2232 Not named PC maintained parenting time and costs order ✅ Yes ✅ Yes ✅ Yes Father alleged bias PC acted without entered court order; relied on transcript over clerk’s notes; dispute about scope and delay in entering order
Odgers v. Odgers 2014 BC 717 Sheila Laughton PC authorized to include B.O., compel coaching, and determine meeting format ✅ Yes ✅ Yes ✅ Yes Mother alleged intimidation and overreach Power imbalance; PC involvement disputed for over a year; unclear order; financial disparity in cost-sharing
D.N.L. v. C.N.S. 2014 BC 1417 Patricia Lane All court-ordered parenting time revoked; child chooses future contact; monitored phone access allowed ❌ No ❌ No Father alleged PC and therapist bias; court found parental alienation unsupported PC model normalized child avoidance; historical PC influence shaped therapist findings; parent used recordings and threats; emotional abuse confirmed
N.R.F. v. M.A.F. 2015 BC 32 Carrie McNeely No enforceable progress; PC removed by court due to high conflict misuse ✅ Yes ✅ Yes ❌ No Father alleged bias; mother used ex-parte communications PC became witness, ex-parte court contact, unequal password sharing, blurred counselling boundaries, used as weapon by mother
D.E.E. v. W.L.E. 2015 BC 612 likely: Leanne Harder [undisclosed] PC acted without authority; Feb 8, 2015 determination struck; contract not terminated but PC left in place pending proper plan/order ❌ No ❌ No ✅ Yes N/A Acted without statutory authority; misdescribed powers in agreement; attempted determinations without a parenting plan
Shapiro v Simpson 2016 BC 211 Dr. Marvin Elterman Final parenting order adopted Dr. Elterman’s schedule; mother’s credibility questioned; shared decision-making declined ✅ Yes ❌ No Mother alleged s.211 bias and narrative framing against her s.211 narrative challenged; evaluator credibility contested; emotional tone of evidence high; lawyer-coaching concern noted
T.J.G. v A.D.G. 2017 BC 1511 Children permitted to express views; ✅ Yes ❌ No Parties overusing email; judicial workaround for procedural defects; co-parenting conflict acknowledged but not escalated
A.K.S. v. A.L.E.S. 2019 BC 419 Geeta Gill +4% overnight time to father upheld ✅ Yes ✅ Yes ❌ No Mother alleged bias PC did not provide reasons for jurisdictional scope; unequal communication alleged
Chatha v Uppal 2019 BC 2081 $1,000 fine imposed; compensatory time reserved ✅ Yes ❌ No compliance related
Kasapoglu v Kasapoglu 2020 BC 2087 Anna Perry Perry disqualified from serving as parenting supervisor; continued non-neutral presence restricted ❌ No ❌ No Former counsel blurred professional boundaries; attempted informal supervision role; caused increased friction; required conduct order
S.M.L. v. J.J.P. 2021 BC 1627 Joan Cotie Grandmother’s unsupervised contact set aside due to inadmissible evidence; father’s parenting time increased to 3 nights/week upheld ⚠️ Partial ❌ No ❌ No Mother challenged use of inadmissible letter Arbitrator relied on evidence explicitly excluded; mother denied opportunity to respond
C.J.C. v. N.J.C. 2021 BC 1930 Kathleen Ouellette Section 7 expenses and parenting time confirmed; PC withdrawal upheld due to unpaid retainer ✅ Yes ✅ Yes ❌ No Father alleged bias, cost inflation, and legal overreach PC issued over 100 invoices; $22k billed; withdrawal after $4k retainer unpaid; scope disputes over extracurriculars and medical decisions
C.M.W. v K.M.C.N 2021 BC 1986 Nicole Garton PC determination upheld; school decision affirmed; PC retained ✅ Yes ✅ Yes ✅ Yes Mother alleged bias; Jurisdictional challenge, parental dissatisfaction, procedural fairness review
R.A.G. v. T.A.I.D. 2022 BC 380 Patricia Lane s.211 scrapped due to cost and delay; new views of child report ordered from Hear the Child Roster ❌ No ❌ No Father raised fairness issues about historic PC influence and therapist collaboration Delayed order implementation; $33K assessment cost; legacy PC decisions part of s.211 material; coordination breakdown
K.R. v S.O. 2022 BC 1381 Anna Perry New PC ordered; partial reallocation of decision-making authority; OFW use enforced ❌ No ❌ No Father alleged PC relied on mother’s version of events and was biased Report included inadmissible double hearsay; overreach on therapy recommendations; PC continued work before full agreement signed; factual disputes with father over payments and neutrality
A.B. v C.D. 2023 BC 1578 Fiona Beveridge Father retained primary care of one child; supervised access ordered for others; PC insights not included in s.211 report ❌ No
York v York 2024 BC 291 Tanya Chamberlain PC reappointed with limited scope (determinations only) for 2 years or until funds are exhausted ✅ Yes ❌ No ❌ No Yes – paras 31–33: Claimant reported feeling “drowned out” and unable to articulate his positions; court acknowledged legitimacy of concern but retained PC anyway. Total Billed: $50,000. - Intake: $13,600 (27%) - Determinations: $16,000 (32%) - Communication/Admin: ~$20,400 (41%) These figures suggest inefficient intake processes, poor cost transparency, and limited enforceable scope boundaries. Court allowed only arbitral services under a capped retainer.
Jeanes v. Shirzad 2024 BC 381 Meena Dhillon Childcare expenses of up to $900/month would be shared ✅ Yes ❌ No ❌ No Mother alleged bias delays, counselling confusion, scope conflict
T.S.T. v. S.Z.T. 2024 BC 1723 Sandra Jennings PC appointment extended; kindergarten dispute resolved; PC authority clarified ✅ Yes ❌ No ✅ Yes Mother alleged bias Retainer nonpayment led to premature PC departure; split communication expectations; repetitive litigation
F.K.L. v D.M.A.T 2025 BC 364 Anna Perry SNIS weekend ruling voided; PC’s conduct overruled; new coordinator not appointed ❌ No ❌ No ❌ No Mother alleged PC bias and misrepresentation of court orders PC issued unauthorized conduct orders against non-guardians; misread court orders; accused party of bullying; undermined prior judicial reasoning; apologized mid-process
F.K.L. v. D.M.A.T. 2025 BC 364 Joan Cotie Parenting Coordinator withdrew due to non-payment and threats of complaint; ❌ No ❌ No ❌ No Yes
Joan Cotie Mediation & Consulting Ltd. v. Eastman 2025 BC 488 Joan Cotie Fee claim dismissed by CRT; PC found to have acted without legal authority ❌ No ❌ No ❌ No N/A No court order or parenting plan in place; unauthorized PC appointment; improper invoice documentation; failed legal contract
Sandhu v. Mangat 2025 BC 920 Fiona Beveridge PC determination upheld; costs awarded to claimant ✅ Yes ✅ Yes ✅ Yes Father alleged bias; Respondent challenged PC’s s.7 determination; court found PC acted within jurisdiction and reasoning was sound
T.A.M. v A.E.B.K. 2025 BC 1627 Joan Cotie Court ordered equal parenting time on 2-2-3 schedule; shared parental responsibilities restored ❌ No ❌ No ❌ No Father alleged bias Cotie acted outside PC scope; failed in duties by enforcing professional roles beyond mandate; caused increased friction; out-of-scope determination;

END OF FILE!