Menu Close
Menu Close
AFCC-Ontario Parenting Plan Guide: Valuable Guidance, Not Binding Law — Aguilar v. Pesantez, 2026 ONCJ 165

AFCC-Ontario Parenting Plan Guide: Valuable Guidance, Not Binding Law — Aguilar v. Pesantez, 2026 ONCJ 165

By: Gol Simaei, Co-President, AFCC-Ontario October 19, 2026

In Aguilar v. Pesantez, 2026 ONCJ 165, Justice Daudlin of the Ontario Court of Justice considered the AFCC-Ontario Parenting Plan Guide in a case involving a father’s motion to expand parenting time with his nine-year-old daughter, who had anxiety, ADHD and other identified learning and emotional needs.

The father relied on the Guide in support of his proposed changes to the parenting schedule, particularly its recommendations about using neutral locations for parenting exchanges and minimizing children’s exposure to parental conflict.

At paragraph 70, Justice Daudlin stated: “The court accepts that the AFCC-O Guidelines reflect valuable and widely accepted social science.”

The Court referred to Tremblay-Chartier v. Blanchette, 2025 ONSC 6273 (Div. Ct.), which recognized that while the Guide is not binding law, Ontario courts have accepted the social science underlying it when making parenting orders. The Court also discussed Gjorsovski v. Krajisnik, 2025 ONSC 7220, which questioned whether Tremblay-Chartier requires judges to provide reasons whenever they depart from the Guide.

Justice Daudlin emphasized that the Guide recognizes that parenting arrangements must be individualized, and that children with anxiety, neurodevelopmental differences or learning disabilities may have greater difficulty with transitions and require greater stability and predictability.

In this case, the Court found that the existing parenting arrangements already largely provided for exchanges at neutral locations, and that the father had not established that his proposed changes would meaningfully reduce parental conflict. The Court also considered the child’s particular needs and the fact that an assessment by the Office of the Children’s Lawyer was underway.

The Court dismissed the father’s motion, finding that there had not been a material change in circumstances justifying a variation of the existing parenting order. The Court further held that, even if a material change were not required, the proposed changes were not in the child’s best interests.

The decision is another example of Ontario courts recognizing the value of the AFCC-Ontario Parenting Plan Guide, while emphasizing the need to consider each child’s individual circumstances.

A revised edition of the Guide will be launched at the AFCC-Ontario Annual Conference on October 23, 2026, and will be available on its website that day.