B.C. mom to have supervised access with son after ‘urine therapy’ accusations
The B.C. Supreme Court has ordered that a mother have only supervised parenting time with her eight-year-old son after allegations surfaced that she was getting him to engage in the practice of “urine therapy,” including drinking his own urine.
The couple, who are only identified by initials in a court ruling, began living in a marriage-like relationship in 2009, got married in 2010 and their son was born in 2012. They separated last year.
The mom is a proponent of homeopathic, holistic and natural remedies and therapies, and admitted that she participated in fasting and urine therapy, including drinking her own urine, starting earlier this year.
It’s alleged that in April, the boy approached his dad and told him that he had a secret and asked him to promise not to tell his mother. The youngster then proceeded to tell his dad that his mother had made him pee in a jar, after which she put the pee into his fruit smoothie. The boy also claimed that his mother was drinking her own urine.
The father reported the allegations to their family doctor, who advised that the Ministry of Child and Family Development had phoned and would be following-up.
The boy later repeated the allegations to the doctor. The dad notified the mom’s lawyer of the allegations and to demand that the practices stop immediately. He said that he would only agree to supervised parenting by the mom from that time forward.
The mother denied using urine therapy on the child. She said she had given the boy a jar to pee into to monitor his lymphatic system, claiming it was a well-known way to check if his kidneys were filtering.
In a ruling on the case, Master Kimberley Robertson noted that both parents had criticized the others’ approach to parenting with the issue of the holistic health practices being one of the many things on which they disagreed. The court’s role was to determine if the parenting of either parent presented a risk of harm to the child to justify one parent being required to have supervised parenting, the master said.
Both parties’ evidence was at times exaggerated in terms of the wrongdoing of the other, but the claimant dad’s evidence was generally more balanced and centred on the child, said Robertson.
“Ultimately, the nub of this application can be summarized by the following statement made by the claimant in his affidavit: ‘(The respondent) is his mom and she loves him, but she is ill and her judgment and health are questionable at this time,’” said Robertson. “I agree with that conclusion.”
On an interim basis, the mom will have supervised parenting time with supervision provided by either a professional group or a third party.