A mother may now be able to spend time with her child again.

The child’s father has failed to convince a judge that he is justified in suspending the parenting time of the woman because of the pandemic.

As B.C. judge Robin McQuillan related in his oral decision, the father was concerned that the COVID-19 crisis may exacerbate the woman’s mental health.

The father claimed this may “cause her to behave in a manner that will pose a risk to the child”.

The man also cited as another reason that there are seven people who live in the mother’s home, hence a risk of transmission by the novel coronavirus.

Before the man began denying parenting time from the mother, the woman had the ability to be with the child on certain days of the week.

The schedule was provided in a February 26, 2020 order.

The woman lost her parenting time starting on March 24, and she sought relief from the court.

According to the judge, the “issue to be determined is whether the Covid-19 crisis, and the public health advisories associated with the crisis, are a change of circumstances such as to justify suspending the mother’s parenting time” set out in the order.

“It is trite, but bears repeating, that every decision that a Court makes must be founded upon a consideration of the best interests of the child only,” McQuillan said.

In the case before him, McQuillan said that the father was “not able to point to any concrete concerns about the mother and her family’s lack of compliance with Covid-19 protocols”.

“His concern appears to be based on the mother’s historical, and likely present, challenges with her mental health which has sometimes manifested in paranoid or conspiratorial ideas,” the judge noted.

According to McQuillan, the man “believes that propensity is likely to be compounded by the prevalence of Covid-19 in the community”.

However, the judge noted that until recently, the father was “satisfied that his concerns would be addressed by the mother’s parenting time being supervised by her parents and her brother”.

“I note that the maternal grandmother is a retired nurse,” the judge stated.

The maternal grandfather is off work due to an injury. All of the other members of the household are students and because schools are closed, they remain at home.

“While this is a large number of people residing in this household, there is nothing to indicate that that alone, or the particular activities of the individuals creates an increased risk of infection for the child, or the community,” McQuillan stated.

Moreover, the woman’s lawyer assured the court that members of her household are complying with public health guidelines.

“I also do not believe that transportation between the two households will increase the risk of infections, provided proper protocols are adhered to,” McQuillan said.

The judge also said that while the mother’s “variable mental health does give rise to a concern, that concern has been addressed by the fact that all of her parenting is supervised”.

“I do not find that concerns in relation to the mother are any greater under Covid-19 than they were before Covid-19, based on recommendations that currently exist,” McQuillan said.

McQuillan did not include a police enforcement clause in his order directing the father to follow the set parenting time for the child’s mother.

“However, in the event that he does not comply, the mother has liberty to apply for an Order for police enforcement,” McQuillan said.

McQuillan added that the decision is based on current public health recommendations and advisories.

“The situation is fluid and changes to those recommendations, or a quarantine of any members of the either parent’s household, could result in a different outcome,” the judge said.

McQuillan also expressed hope that the parties, whose identities were anonymized, are “able to be open and transparent with one another regarding any developments in their respective households  so that the health and well-being of the child, as well as the community at large, remain their priorities”.