Joint custody needs good communications between parents

Vamos v. Vamos, 2012 ONCA 262 holds, as is well established, that parents have to be at least on good speaking terms for joint custody to be awarded:

[9]          To have custody of a child is to have decision-making responsibilities in relation to the child's care and upbringing.  Good communication between parents is relevant to the appropriateness of a joint custody order. In our view, the trial judge, who had the benefit of seeing and hearing the parties over the nine-day trial, gave adequate reasons for refusing to order joint custody. He found, at paras. 58-60 of his reasons:

This is not an appropriate case for an order for joint custody. As noted by the Ontario Court of Appeal in Kaplanis v. Kaplanis (2005), 194 O.A.C. 106 (C.A.), a mere hope for better communications between parents after the litigation has ended is not a sufficient basis to order joint custody.

Based on the evidence before me, there is no indication that the parties could effectively co-parent the children. This is a case rife with conflict between the parents and with serious allegations levelled against each other.

In my view, an order for joint custody would not be in the children's best interests and would only lead to further conflict between the parents.

[10]       Those findings were amply supported by the evidence and justified the conclusion that given the lack of communication and cooperation between these parties, joint custody was not a viable option.