Abstract
The author critically analyzes the Supreme Court of Canada decision on child custody and relocation of custodial parents in Gordon v. Goertz (1996). She argues that the reasoning of the majority reflects a trend to artificially reconstruct a "post-divorce family unit" that has a potentially problematic impact on women's decision-making. Limits on women's self-determination may in turn produce detrimental effects for the children in their care. The author places the case in the context of recent Canadian legal trends on relocation and reviews the arguments made by both parties and intervenors (including the Women's Legal Education and Action Fund) in the case. She compares the judgements of Madame Justice McLachlin and Madame Justice L'Huereux-Dubé and concludes with some difficult questions for Canadian feminists. (English) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 447-468 |
Number of pages | 22 |
Journal | Canadian Journal of Women and the Law |
Volume | 9 |
Issue number | 2 |
Publication status | Published - Dec 1997 |