"Custody" is the word most people use, but the law in most of Canada has moved to two separate questions — decision-making responsibility and parenting time — and understanding the difference changes how you read every letter about your kids.
Older language treated custody as one all-or-nothing label, and that framing still shapes how a lot of people talk about their case even though the Divorce Act and most provincial statutes now split it into two distinct pieces. Decision-making responsibility is about who has the authority to decide the big things: education, healthcare, religion, and major extracurricular commitments. Parenting time is about the day-to-day schedule — where the child sleeps on a given night, who does pickups, how holidays and school breaks are divided. A parent can have full parenting time on their days and zero decision-making authority, or joint decision-making with a schedule that's far from equal. They are negotiated separately, and a letter that blurs them together is worth reading twice.
This distinction matters most when a proposal from the other side uses the word 'custody' loosely. A letter asking for 'sole custody' might really be proposing sole decision-making with a fairly generous time-sharing schedule, or it might be proposing both. Courts generally expect parents to spell out which piece they mean, and a good response asks for that clarity rather than reacting to the word alone.
Every court asked to weigh in on parenting arrangements applies a best-interests-of-the-child standard, and it is deliberately broad rather than a checklist with a score. Courts generally consider things like the child's own views (weighted by age and maturity), each parent's ability to care for the child's needs, the history of caregiving before separation, the child's relationships with each parent and with siblings, and any history of family violence. No single factor is automatically decisive, and courts are not asked to judge which parent is 'better' overall — only what arrangement serves this child.
One factor that shows up repeatedly in decisions and in negotiation letters is which parent has been willing to support the child's relationship with the other parent. A parent who appears to be limiting contact, screening calls, or making unilateral decisions without consulting the other side often finds that pattern referenced back to them later. This is one reason it helps to respond to parenting proposals in writing, calmly, even when the instinct is to just handle things directly with the child in the middle.
In practice, few contested cases are fights over the two-question framework itself — most disagreement clusters around a handful of recurring flashpoints: relocation (one parent wanting to move the child to a new city or province), schedule changes as a child gets older or starts school, disagreements over school or medical choices under joint decision-making, and introducing a new partner to the children. Each of these tends to generate a letter proposing a change and a response either agreeing, countering, or contesting it.
Relocation in particular is treated seriously and, in many provinces, has specific notice requirements before a move can happen — this is an area where getting early advice from a local family lawyer is worth the cost, since the notice rules and timelines vary and missing one can affect the outcome regardless of the merits.
Parenting disputes generate an unusually dense paper trail: proposed schedules, counter-proposals, requests to vary a holiday, complaints about missed exchanges. Because the standard is best interests rather than a fixed rule, courts and mediators often look at the pattern of behaviour over months, not just the current snapshot — which means a single missed reply or an unanswered proposal can read very differently in isolation than it does next to everything that came before and after it.
A practical approach: treat every letter that proposes a schedule change, raises a decision-making disagreement, or references the children's welfare as something to log with its date and exact wording, even if it feels minor at the time. Confirm with a local family lawyer before agreeing to or rejecting any change in writing, since a casual reply can later be read as a position.
Not exactly. 'Custody' is the everyday word, but current family law generally separates it into decision-making responsibility (who decides big things) and parenting time (the day-to-day schedule). A letter using 'custody' should be read carefully to see which one it actually means.
Not directly, and not at any fixed age. Courts generally give a child's views weight based on their age and maturity as one factor among several in the best-interests analysis, not as a deciding vote. Confirm how this applies with a local family lawyer.
Generally, joint decision-making means both parents need to agree on major decisions like schooling or non-emergency medical care. A pattern of one parent deciding unilaterally is often something the other side raises in later letters or court filings, so it's worth confirming your specific order or agreement's wording with a lawyer.
SortMyDivorce reads every letter about your kids and turns it into one organized case: each proposed schedule change, each decision-making disagreement, each deadline, with the exact quote it came from. $39/year.
This guide is general information, not legal advice. Laws change and differ by jurisdiction — confirm specifics with a local family lawyer or your court's official website. If you use SortMyDivorce, your letters stay confidential — never shared, never sold.