This week’s guest blog is written by a Self-Represented Litigant, who prefers to remain anonymous.
I recently had the misfortune of having to file documentation in my family law case in Ontario.
In addition to the trauma of the experience that led me to that moment, I was forced to make a decision about expense – financial vs. personal: I could either pay costly legal fees, or sacrifice my time, collect my emotions, and test my internet research savvy.
The easy (but expensive) part: making a separation agreement
After having been separated for just under two years, I was still recovering from the massive financial expenses I had personally incurred both from losing half of my shared assets (material and financial), and spending over $10,000 on legal fees for a lawyer to draft my separation agreement.
I had walked in to my introductory meeting with my soon-to-be lawyer with a document outlining almost every single detail of a separation agreement that had already been worked out with my spouse. We had determined the splitting of household assets, childcare, and child support amounts in advance. Despite minimal negotiations over the course of approximately two back and forth emails between our lawyers, on two details, I still ended up with a whopping legal fee for my agreement.
Down the rabbit hole: filing for divorce
Having had our agreement finalized, I knew that there was one step remaining to dissolve my marriage: filing for divorce. Given that my former spouse and I were as amicable as could be in such a situation, we jointly decided to self-represent for this last formality. We wanted to spend our money on caring for our two children rather than additional legal fees. We had a signed agreement, had the assets already separated, had a monthly rhythm for child support payments – we thought it would be relatively straightforward. At that time, I had no idea of the different kind of expense that lay ahead for me.
I began to research online to understand what forms were required to file my jointly-agreed-upon divorce, which would occur after an almost 2-year separation. With the search “required documents for divorce Ontario”, I was brought to the forms page of the Ontario courts website. With the help of a second search I saw that to file for divorce I would need five things: document 8A, 25A, two affidavits (one for me and one for my spouse), and a copy of the original marriage certificate.
It looked straightforward…
I took a breath. Ok. Fairly straightforward. I set to work filling out the forms. I was immediately forced to pause at the very first question: “Ontario court or Superior court?”. Another browser tab was opened, a new search began. After visiting several websites, I was able to feel at least fairly confident in my selection of “Superior court”. And so I moved on. The next question: “simple or joint divorce”? Another new search. My divorce seemed “simple”, since all claims were agreed upon and we both wanted this… but I worried that this might not be the full intent of the selection. Another search.
Several hours later, with my five documents ready, I coordinated a date with my spouse to meet at the courthouse to file. Based on the “witnessed by” field, we surmised that we needed the affidavit commissioned.
I need what?
I arrived at the courthouse at 8:30 a.m., the opening time listed on the website. I quickly learned that the courthouse doors had actually opened earlier, and what appeared to be a savvy crew of regulars were already lined up for the “ticket” line – where documents are checked to ensure general completeness, and upon approval, submitters are given a ticket where they progress to the filing office.
When I got to the front of the line I placed my papers on the desk for review. My stomach sank when I was asked for my two pre-addressed envelopes with pre-paid postage. I hadn’t seen this requirement listed anywhere on any website that I had come across. Luckily, I was able to make a phone call to my spouse, who was running late, and he was able to pick them up on his way. Crisis averted.
I was then told that because I had acknowledged that there was child support involved within the order, as well as property claims, I had to have the details written out on required form 25A.
I phoned in a favour, and had a friend take a Word document copy of my finalized separation agreement and paste it into a “general order” template. On form 25A, I referenced this order. I was also told that I would need to include four copies of form 25A. Thankfully, I had enough change in my wallet and was able to use the photocopier in the filing office for $0.25/page. I thus was able to get my ticket.
Next step: the registry
Then the wait. The very long wait. With my “L” ticket, which I later found out was a particular ticket letter given to identify each self-represented litigant at the filing office, I spent four hours waiting for my number to be called. 
Then another blow. I was told by the gentleman at the counter that since I had child support referenced in the order (8A), I had to have four standard Family Responsibility Office clauses included in the general order. Again… this detail was nowhere to be found in my preliminary research. I was almost in tears. I would need to update my documents and come back. Thankfully, I was given the FRO clause wording as I left, and I immediately updated the general order to include these when I got access to a computer.
By the time I left the courthouse, I had lost over half of a day of work.
A second run at filing
A few days later, I returned to the courthouse. This time, I arrived at 8 a.m. and waited for the courthouse to open. I was sixth in line, and when I got to the front I was told that I was the “first L ticket of the day”, and felt fortunate. I walked confidently into the registry.
I waited. This time for two hours. By 10 a.m., a gentleman who had been in line behind me asked the person at his window if “L” tickets were being served. He was a regular, had noticed that I had been ahead of him, saw I had an “L” ticket, and was feeling some pity for me. I hadn’t dared ask, given the sign posted nearby requesting that no one interrupt service at a counter.
After some discussion between clerks behind the counter, I was told that the person who was supposed to be at the window hadn’t shown up that day. I was then told that someone would help me soon. At 10:15a.m., I saw a clerk. By 10:17 a.m., I was tearing up. The clerk told me that my documents weren’t acceptable and that my general order couldn’t be used. According to the rules, I had to have my separation agreement cut and pasted into the actual document (25A) template. When I tried to explain that it didn’t fit in the form due to a character limit (I had tried this approach at first), I was told “yes, I know. You just have to be creative and ‘pretend’ that it fits”. Further, I needed to produce even more forms. I was required to also include forms 13A and 31A to cover child support requirements, as well as a financial disclosure. I was now in front of my fourth person at the courthouse, and being told of this requirement for the first time.
Having lost another two and a half hours off my paycheck, and feeling frustrated and defeated, I left the courthouse again.
Third time lucky?
I returned to the courthouse for a third time, having made my updates to form 25A (which involved a lot of cutting and pasting), arriving at 8 a.m. (I was a regular now). I waited 30 minutes, had my financial disclosure affidavit witnessed, and went back to the front desk to get my ticket.
In the registry, the supervisor I had seen on my second visit recognized and fast-tracked me. I was able to finish the filing process in about 45 minutes, and was told that within a few weeks I would hear back on whether or not the judge would approve or require any further documentation.
Fingers crossed.
A system that makes smart people feel stupid
Being university-educated, a member of a family saturated with legal professionals, and embarking on a mutually-agreed-upon divorce, I thought I was in a good position to file myself.
Instead, I discovered that there’s a punishing lack of information for those who self-represent. Not only were the required document sets unclear, but how to properly complete them was not at-all straightforward. Through trial and error (no pun intended), I learned small tricks, such as that the applicant has to appear as the first name on all forms, even when it is the respondent’s affidavit. I learned the difference between a “joint” and “simple” divorce (no, you cannot select both).
My experience as a self-represented person filing for divorce was mitigated by some positive personal factors: a small understanding of legalese (for example, I knew what an affidavit was), easy access to resources like a computer and printer, flexibility with my working hours, and good Samaritans.
I cannot begin to think of what the experience might look like for someone without these simple advantages. If I had been working for a company with strict hours, I would have lost as much as three days of income. And I cannot fairly estimate the hours required for improperly filling out the documents as a result of a lack of familiarity with legal language.
Change is critical: information for self-reps
In an overwhelmed legal system, why does the Ministry of the Attorney-General not prioritize the creation of an online solution to improve access to information for self-represented litigants? There is ample technology, such as AI (chat bots): for minimal investment, and at a low cost to maintain, a resource could e-serve information to the public. 
This would educate self-reps at the outset, and therefore reduce churn and distress once within the system. As a person with a good education and reasonable research skills, my experience involved three separate trips to the courthouse, interacting with clerks on eight separate occasions.
There needs to be a decision at the highest level of government to prioritize change. Only with a different action will there be a different reaction. I hope not only that I never have to go through such a process again, but that the legal system will prioritize a resolution that would avoid a similar experience for others. For me, that would be a positive return on my investment.
I have always said I would rather appear in the Court of Appeal with three judges who thought my arguments were nonsense than appear before a court clerk.
I have also said that the instead of making the filing simple and efficient it looks like the opposite was intended.
It does not matter if you are self represented or not, it depends on the clerk and the courthouse where you are filing. I have had documents filed and then some months later using the same precedents the documents were refused. It is well past the time that the government began simplifying the whole process and explaining to the clerks that they are not gatekeepers.
here here,,,, yes,,, they seem to think they are the gatekeepers. whole new attitude needs to exist there.,
It would be so simple for a checklist to be made of resources you must use to educate yourself when facing SRL court appearances and filings. There are so many complainers about SLRs among the legal professionals but no discussions as to the why. The truth is legal fees are far too high and many cannot afford to hire a lawyer. Soon there will be very few clients for lawyers to haggle over. That’s a reality. Today I see the Premier of Ontario tweeting that liquor retail stores will have longer hours; first we get $1/beers, now this. We need to evolve and family law affects so many facets of life and robs families of money that could be better spent on their children in times of trauma from a family is breaking apart!
This is typical bureaucracy and it can be found in every gov’t agency or business entity. It happens for any number of reasons beginning with indifferent employees, systems that cannot (or will not) respond to need for change/updating, and fast-moving technology that the business (and its workers) cannot keep up with–or won’t bother to, not to mention just general stupidity of those in power who make lousy decisions intended to ease their lives, not the lives of those they (presumably) serve.
These problems are augmented by teeny tyrannies of the low-level employees who make it their job to make the lives of those they theoretically serve as miserable as possible.
Answer? Get used to it. And make sure you don’t do it in your own job.
I think there is an opportunity for a board game like Monopoly where players spin a dial and then navigate through the court system with the snakes and ladders built in. The first player to successfully file their case wins the game. This would be an amazing opportunity for an entrepreneur game maker and at the same time educate the public how flawed the system really is. Fun for all especially during the holiday season.
There is our personal time…and then there is the time of court staff plus the cost to operate the courthouses. Both cost the taxpayer ALOT of money in lost revenue. I say revenue, even though courts systems provide a service but not necessarily a profit, they still use “money” to function and it is the taxpayer who pays for that, not via court filing fees. The financial loss due to the inefficiency of the system is incredible, and from my own experience and research the court clerks technically cannot refuse any documents, even if they are not filled in or completed quite correctly. It is right on the Canadian Judicial Councils website, in the Charter and Human Rights Codes as well as international protocol (UN) regarding access to justice albeit the Courts of Justice Act is what the court clerks will rely on. Caselaw is beginning to make a difference as well. See: SCC caselaw Pintea v Johns and the Statement of Principals for Self-represented Litigants and Accused Persons which can be found online by google searching. Always fact-check information for yourself…If you can find the information, that is.
I feel the same about the family court system. However, I lost no time at work when I filed. I was served while I was working 12 hours night shift. I worked on my papers in the morning after work for 4 hours, then slept 8 before the night shift.
I had access to the Internet and a computer to fill out and print forms.
The stress was insurmountable. Sleep was just about impossible. Subconsciously working on documents while sleeping and waking with the “working on documents” mode still running as I woke.
This went on for 7 months during my child custody/access procedings as well as a trumpted up domestic assault charge laid by our local constablitory from lies from my ex trying to discredit me personally in family court.
You see, mine was a hostile divorse involving stepchildren, a blood child of 7 years( a witness to the non assault), shoddy police work, CAS phycobabble,
and child abuse inflicted on my daughter at the local women’s shelter.
The whole system works to fund the lawyers and garentee funding for social services while the middle class pay the taxes that support the legal system, we are far from a clear access to it.
The only people able to access family and criminal counsel are the indigint and the affluent. Nuff said.
Thanks for this venue.
Thank you for your very well written and thoughtful article. There is no excuse at all that in 2018 the legal system has not recognized that 80% of family law litigants are self-represented and adjusted support and administrative mechanisms accordingly.
Your many days of wasted time could have been avoided had the courts audited their own system with ‘stupid, ordinary people with university degrees’ such as yourself – wherein they would have discovered the missing information and faults in their administrative system.
After so many years of this nonsense, one must conclude that the continued chaos in the court process is at least deliberately ignored by the legal profession and courts to protect the legal cabal’s monopoly.
As a Self Represented person, one of the best and most informative sites on the internet is CanLII. E-Laws is also useful. Most of the people I have dealt with at the counter have been very helpful . Although they are quick to point out that:
(a) They cannot provide legal advice; and
(b) They recommend FLIC or that you speak to a lawyer…
The people in the filing offices, in my opinion, deserve a huge pat on the back for all they do under the circumstances.
one thing missed here I s what if the staff at the desk refuse to answer your procedural questions,, because they claim it is giving you “legal advice”. how about asking who transferred your file out to another district without telling you,, for a court date you were not informed of. I tried this, and was told those were private internal documents. How about asking why the court is not following the procedure as it is written. And getting indignant rudeness from judges for daring to make such an inquiry, And how about the court of appeal staff, repeatedly claiming that your faxed appeal documents did not arrive,,, even though you had a confirmation sheet, just plain lying to you. How about lawyers asking for hugh sums of money to be deposited with the court BEFORE YOU ARE ALLOWED TO BE HEARD., basically,, you have lost,, now just churn the wheel,,, and pay the money. These are I am sure, only some of the things that the court does to the self represented,, all of them happened to me, The smug grins on their faces when they watch you pay and pay is appalling,, and it is not,, not not justice., now the courts of BC are claiming to be working so hard,, with the SELF REPRESENTEDS ORGANIZATION,, because they really really care about the rights of the public,, It is a big PR game, I have said again and again,, watch how they implement the new rules regarding the self represented, ie,,, they don’t, Watch how they TREAT the self represented,,,, exactly the same, with contempt and disregard. And if you do try to obtain legal help,, not one lawyer will take your caae, because,, you are now persona non grata. It is paralyzing to be treated in such a manner,, especially if you happen to have developed PTSD as a result of the years of this abuse,
Continuing Legal Education Ontario (CLEO) has a fantastic resource, http://www.stepstojustice.ca, to help self-represented folks with exactly this kind of thing. And they are building guided online Q&A sessions that help to populate all your court forms for you. At the end of the Q&A process, you actually get an organized checklist of all the next steps required to move forward, including what you and your former spouse must do before filing. And in Ontario, for some divorces – you can now file them online! CLEO’s done some great work to simplify and demystify the divorce process.
In BC a lawyer, JP Boyd, wrote a book over 600 pages and created Clicklaw Wikibooks. Unfortunatley, it is provincial legislation mostly (for BC residents), but has some Federal (for Canadian residents). There is also a website Family Law in BC run by the Legal Services Society of BC. It would be great to use these two resources to model similar resources for all provinces in Canada. The government of BC also has a page on their site The Family Law Act (of BC) Explained which goes through each section and explains them in laymen’s terms. A handout from the Courts should be emailed or handed if SRLs come in person to links explaining you must follow: 1) The rules of Court, 2) Legislation and also that you can use CanLii, online recent Jidgments (which both give you great information as to what the courts do and don’t want) and firstly, if a person is in “fight mode” that they immediately seek some counselling until the fire is out. Also, if their exes behaviour is not “abuse” (lots of resources to determine that), that the person seek legal advice and determine specifically if an issue even affects the outcome of what they ultimately want the court to order. That’s the biggest hurdle is people thinking that telling the Courts what a terrible person their spouse was is going to get them what they want. It doesn’t, it’s the legislation sections that get you that and lawyers should be able to tell you specifically what legislation you can get your order under. Education is super important when you are a SRL. Emotions need to be controlled to do that! Rules of Court must be followed and checked every move you make, go through the index and see which rules apply to the action you are taking. Same with legislation read the index and every section you think applies to your issue. Another useful BC resource is on the Court’s of BC website, they have a list of commonly asked for family law orders. Fantastic tool. Leads you to sections of legislation and helps you with the wording for your documents.
Thank you for an excellent accounting of your experience, and ultimately my experience over the past 10 years as a self-Represented litigant in Family court.
Unfortunately, even though I paid $6,000.00 for a lawyer to represent me in negotiating a Separation Agreement, if the other side won’t follow it, you end up in the court process.
I was a traditional stay at home mom for 28 years. Like you, I had the benefit of a higher education which taught me how to research and discuss legal issues with the FLIC lawyers at the courthouse. One thing I found was that many times I was given conflicting information depending on the lawyer. This makes it even harder on the self represented.
Once I finally figured out what to do, like you, I had to navigate through filing clerks who may or may not have been helpful. After about 7 years of being belittled while trying to file I started to ask for the “supervisor” to settle disagreements on how the clerks interpreted what I could file versus what the FLIC lawyers had told me to file.
I wanted to give all self-represented litigants hope by letting you know that I experienced the same frustrations as you through 2 family trials and finally this year I self-represented in the Ontario Court of Appeal successfully.
Please see – http://www.ontariocourts.ca/decisions/2018/2018ONCA0596.htm
ONCA 596
DATE: 20180628
DOCKET: C63328
Those of us that can stay strong, must continue forward, fighting for all those who just can’t take the pain, the frustrations, the stress, the losses and the insults navigating the Family Law in Ontario.
Thank you to the NSRLP! We need to help each other!
You don’t know what in-law really means until you try to end a marriage. Suddenly you are in up to your nose in it and it stinks. I read a study in Ont. where judges consider self reps to be an interruption to the process. I quickly saw through this enterprise created for lawyers by lawyers who have no interest in ending anything and decided I could not pay one.
Every time I did speak to one through legal aid or the few office lawyers that I saw all said the same thing- You should get a lawyer. It seemed like some solemn swear in the dark rooms of college initiation- always uphold the firm.
To the entire legal profession as functioning adults in my society I say Our children deserve better. We deserve better.
Marriage is now legally dangerous and should be seriously questioned.
In response to the otherwise logical suggestion that people in ‘fight mode” implement safe self support during difficult times and having investigated this aspect of the problem for the last 10 years, I offer the following as food for serious consideration to anyone interfacing with the legal system.
1. Despite the spiel you will be given, there is no such thing as privacy while ones life is immersed in the legal process.
2. Any contact with the “mental health” system can and likely will be used to effectively silence and discredit you as unstable, unfit etc.
3. Research into this phenomenon has already shown that SRL, in general are at high risk of being painted in a disparaging, stereotypical, stigmatizing, discriminatory manner, based on scientifically unfounded slurs and attacks on our characters (or more accurately, lack thereof.)
4. Despite the lack of credible science supporting the same, all human emotion, thought, feeling, behavior and belief, have been medicalized, pathologized and misrepresented as “brain diseases resulting from chemical imbalances called mental illness”; as opposed to being what they are: understandable reactions to extreme distress.
5. There is no credible science supporting the failed chemical imbalance theory. A host of evidence exposing it as misinformation including from top ranking members of the APA, the NIMH (which withdrew all funding for the DSM5 owing to a lack of scientific credibility) and a host of other credible resources, exists.
6. Over a 100 years and countless billions of dollars have feed scientist in search of some evidence that ‘MI” is a biological entity as opposed to a subjective, checklist of symptoms known to be caused by a host of factors. Although there is a continued scramble to attempt to legitimize DSM diagnosis’s, in the meantime, no one should be misdiagnosed and mistreated as if they were “mentally ill” with a brain disease that no one can remotely prove exists.
7. One would be hard pressed to find anyone supporting the notion that it is acceptable to misdiagnose and mistreat people with cancer that they do not have. And that when this happens, that person is an indisputable victim of medical malpractice and insurance fraud.
8. The DSM could not pass a legitimate junk science litigation and no one should be subject to the serious personal consequences that come part and parcel with a specious diagnosis.
9. Despite this, countless people will be subjected to, accused of and found guilty of having some “MI” which will then serve as the basis by which the defense and court can discredit you and can mandate “evaluations and drugs for everyone” (including your children) that financially benefit the system.
10. Being subjected to a “MI” diagnosis can result in the loss of legal rights, loss of freedom, being force drugged with psych drugs proven to be neurotoxic, ineffective and dangerous and the loss of access to ones children, to name but a few.
11. Although there is a tenancy to discredit and shoot the messengers exposing the crisis, make no mistake, this problem has been acknowledged, is known and is being discussed at the UN level, by countless professional organizations and at the grass-roots level.
12. Many victims of systemic legal abuse and institutional betrary believe they have developed PTS”D”.
13. PTS and cPTS are not diseases/disorders. They are understandable reactions to extreme & prolonged stress.
14. Logically, experiences, thoughts and feelings are not and cannot be diseases. The mind is a hypothetical construct that does not exist in the human body. One cannot have a disease in an imaginary organ, they can only have an imaginary disease, in an hypothetical entity.
15. The APA admitted that the term “mental illness” is nonsensical misnomer, “bullshit” and a convenient allegory to get people to comply to taking toxic drugs with horrific effects (including early death, a host of diseases, risks of completed suicide, permanent sterilizing, birth defects, and up to 25 years premature death) and that they had never meet a psychiatrist who actually believed the “chemical imbalance” myth. Tragically and illegally, this has never stopped them from providing this misinformation to the public.
16. No one is saying that human suffering is not real or even potentially debilitating, but that they are not bona fide medical diseases rending one unstable or dangerous, (stigma and discrimination) requiring one put their health and safety at risk doing so. As per the Black Box Warnings on these drugs, they increase the risks of completed suicide, they do NOT prevent it.
17. The best research on brain injured vets suffering c-PTS trauma was/is by Peter Breggin, Retired Col Bart Billings, Chuck Ruby of ISEPP (War Fighters) and Paula Caplan who was one of the first to expose the DSM as a fraud. Research on the poisoning of vets with anti-biotics that cause the SYMPTOMS misdiagnosed as if they are “mental illness”, is being done by the Quinism Foundation.
18. It takes on average 7 years to get an accurate diagnosis, often longer for women and rare diseases, up to 15 years and even 30 years.
19. Symptom being misdiagnosed as “MI” (which are not diseases in and of themselves but the bodies innate intelligent warning/feedback system alerting the host that something is wrong and should not be suppressed with toxic drugs as it makes it difficult if not impossible to ascertain the root cause of those symptoms) are known to be caused by:
20. 100+ bona fide medical conditions called medical mimics and more recently by Kelly Brogan as “psychiatric pretenders”
21. 500+ prescription drugs and street drugs that can result in Adverse Drug Events (ADE) and risk one being misdiagnosed. Allopathic “medicine” taken as prescribed is the 4th leading cause of death- Gotzsche; some say the 3 leading cause – Olsen (only behind heart disease and cancer which they also cause, making them and dr’s the leading cause of death in the US
22. and numerous everyday experiences, including but not limited to: dehydration, lack of sleep, vitamin deficiencies, being on a ventilator or in hospital (esp for seniors) being traumatized or exposure to an environmental toxin.
23. Because there is no privacy while one is in court proceedings, finding SAFE support to work through normal healthy anger, despair etc, is not easy and can come with a risk to your and your children’s futures given that:
24. most, if not ALL victims are labeled defective and diseased with “mental illness” by virtue of their “experiences” and someone elses choice to harm them. Perpetrators of harm against them are most often seen as “norm” everyday people protected from “crazy labels” with a host of excuses including, stress, money problems, alcohol drug addiction, uncontrollable urges, bad upbringing…whatever works to keep them from facing just consequences for their choice of actions.
25. Although completely false, unproven and dis-proven, misinformation, popular belief that “mental illness” is genetic, sets everyone up for the easy leap that if you are “MI”, by genetic extension, so too are your children and their children and theirs and so on until, everyone is “MI”. “MI” is the fraud that keeps on giving, or more accurately, taking. It takes people’s sanity, force streams them into a no-exit system as a life long “mental patient” by twisting normal human distress arising from social crisis, into a medical disease rather than human problems.
26. The medicalization of social problems are arguably NOT being resolved by the legal system, but are in fact being exasperated and worsened by association with it. The ‘mental health” system is part and parcel of the legal system and benefits greatly off people’s everyday conflicts, misfortunes and human suffering.
27. BUYER BEWARE.
The court forms barely offer any instruction on how to fill them out. And if you ask for assistance, they tell you that they cannot give you any legal advice, which is preposterous, as I’m asking for legal procedural information. For instance, the form for Notice of Motion, no where does it tell you on the form or the Ontario Courts website that you are supposed to contact the court for a date and time for a hearing. How is anyone supposed to know that if they don’t tell you anything? The information only says that you have to give 10 days notice, but how am I supposed to get a date and time? Simply said, the system is designed to gaslight all who are attempting to self-represent. There really should be an instructional guidebook that comes with these forms, similar to how Tax Forms comes with instructions! I don’t think this is a difficult demand to fulfill, but rather, it serves a purpose for those who do not care to implement such directives. The lawyers want to keep it all a secret to themselves because that is where the money is. As long as you can keep these forms a mystery, then you preserve the profits. It is a total racket.