Silber+c.+Fenske

**Facts:** 8 months after the demise of their intimate relationship, Silber gives birth to a child, and Fenske certifies under VSA that he is the father. He makes $300,000 annually, and she $42,000. She has applied for a blood test to verify paternity, interim support of 2,500 a month and prenatal expenses totaling 2,923. **Held:** granted blood tests, support of $2,250/month and prenatal expenses deferred. **Issues:** **(1)** Is there a Charter violation flowing from the requirement to give blood for the paternity test? (S.7 or s.8) **(2)** Given the effects of s.10, what support should be ordered? **Reasoning:** **(1)** Both Charter arguments fail. S.8 because there is no force to comply with the search, merely a presumption flowing from the decision not to, and s.7 fails because the liberty of the accused is not at stake. There is no possibility of incarceration, and paying child support does not constitute an infringement of liberty. **(2)** “Unless parties are impoverished, the minimalist approach is no appropriate. The goal for the children should be a standard of living commensurate with the incomes of he parents.” Also, specific to housing: “the custodial parent in most cases has probably made a very real financial sacrifice for the benefit of the child…” While Fenske alleges that she should be living in an apartment, with lower cost, the court believes that the child’s standard of living should not suffer while he declines to comply with the order for blood tests.
 * Silber v. Fenske [Ont] (1995)**