A B.C. judge has awarded a mother of an autistic son more than $125,000 in retroactive child support payments from the British man who fathered the child following what’s described as a “brief intimate relationship.”
In Port Coquitlam provincial court, Judge Nicholas Preovolos ordered "G.W.," the biological father, to pay "E.S.," the mother, $1,957 each month, dating back to Dec. 1, 2018, around the time the son was born.
The “provisional” order falls under the Interjurisdictional Support Orders Act and will require reciprocation of a British court. (Much of the Commonwealth and many European nations, plus the United States are party to the act.)
For now, the order stands based on some guesswork of what G.W. earns as income since G.W. was not entitled to a notice of E.S.’s application here in B.C. and E.S. has limited knowledge of G.W. other than open-source information, such as being listed on LinkedIn as a “Business Unit Managing Director at [omitted for publication].”
The judge estimated G.W.’s salary based on Glass Door, a website that provides information on jobs and their respective salaries. While E.S. submitted a higher-end salary of $470,000 the judge settled on $227,000.
The order could be altered depending on what the actual income of G.W. is, the judge noted.
G.W. impregnated E.S. some time in 2018 while the two were travelling. E.S. told the court she was sure it was G.W.’s son as she had not had sex with anyone at least one month prior to the brief encounter.
E.S. informed G.W. in spring 2018 and G.W. wrote back to her on Facebook to say that he did not want any part of raising a child with E.S.
“I understand that this is difficult for you but please don’t do this. It will ruin my life. Ruin my relationship with the woman I love,” G.W. wrote, according to the message provided in the court ruling.
“You know how I feel about this but I can’t make this decision for you. If you want this baby then it’s your baby but has nothing to do with me,” wrote G.W. on April 14, 2018, adding: “I dont (sic) doubt you will love this child and I’m glad you will have support with your choice. However this is not my child, with due respect I barely know you, it was a complete mistake and this is frankly my worst nightmare. So I’ll respect your decision if you will please respect mine and understand I don’t want anything to do with this, please do not contact me again.”
E.S. and G.W. never communicated since, according to the judgment and E.S. proceeded to have the child, which was eventually diagnosed with autism, leading to E.S. claiming difficulties working.
E.S. submitted to the court that she has two sources of income: social assistance of $860 per month and an income tax benefit for her son of $1,071 per month. She also lives in her parents’ basement suite, rent free and has few assets, aside from $15,000 cash from a retroactive disability tax credit that she received due to her son’s autism diagnosis.
“E.S. presented evidence to the court of her son’s autism diagnosis and testified about some of the challenges he faces. Like other children with autism, he has certain “special interests” such as ceiling fans, fire alarms and electricity, has social difficulties, and must adhere to a strict routine to maintain emotional stability,” the judge wrote in the recently-published March 1 decision.
