Bell+c.+Bell


 * Ontario Court of Appeal, 1955

Facts: - In 1950, Mr. Bell and Ms. Bell had a daughter. - When the child was 3, Ms. Bell ran away with the child to her parents' house and lived there with the child for a year. - Mr. Bell then came and got the child and moved her to //his// parents' house. ** ** - The Ontario Superior Court granted custody solely to the father, and gave access to the mother two weeks per year. - The mother is appealing that judgment. **

Who should get custody of the child? Only the mother, and the father should get access every Saturday and two weeks of the year. **  - Mr. Bell commented on a sinisterly close relationship between Ms. Bell and a fellow female schoolteacher, but Roach J. does not find anything in the evidence to conclude this is true. - It is impossible to choose between the maternal-grandparents and paternal-grandparents homes: both are great for the child. The maternal-grandparents home has the advantage that Ms. Bell's sister lives there and takes good care of the child. - The trial judge did not find Ms. Bell //inadequate// for custody. He simply awarded custody only to Mr. Bell. By giving Ms. Bell access, he could not have thought Ms. Bell was a detrimental influence on her child. - Though not stated, the trial judge must have made his custody decision because he thought that Ms. Bell did a great wrong to Mr. Bell by leaving him. A child is entitled to the combined care of two parents. There is no reason the parents should have split up (no disparity in age, normal sex life, no misconduct, etc). The fact that Ms. Bell is the author of these circumstances (that can so easily be remedied by her returning to Mr. Bell) outweighs her wish for custody. - But we are concerned here with the best interests of the child. For the child, the maternal-grandparents' home is slightly better, and a child in her tender years is better off with her mother:
 * Issue:**
 * Held:
 * Reasoning (Roach J.):


 * The trial judge overlooked a matter of great weight: "that this infant is a little girl of very tender years. No father, no matter how well intentioned or how solicitous for the welfare of such a child, can take the full place of the mother. Instinctively, a little child, particularly a little girl, turns to her mother in her troubles, her doubts and her fears. In that respect nature seems to assert itself. The feminine touch means so much to a little girl; the frills and the flounces and the ribbons in the matter of dress; the whispered consultations and confidences on matters which to the child's mind should only be discussed with Mother; the tender care, the soothing voice; all these things have a tremendous effect on the emotions of the child. This is nothing new; it is as old as human nature and has been recognized time after time in the decisions of our Courts." (para. 20)**

**