Quelle-Looney!

Judges in Quebec continue to prove they are nuts and need to retire to a life of gathering same, puttering around in gardens or doing other things where they can't do stupid stuff like this.

First, of course, we have the judge who agreed to hear this case to start with. I'm not sure of the exact translation, so I'll use the English word: Dolt.

Here's the case: Daughter of divorced parents, age 12, moves in with Dad. Daughter's internet use and pattern of disobedience worries Dad, who tells her to stay off the computer. Daughter, being 12 and all, disobeys Dad and as a result, Dad withholds permission to go on a school trip. Again, I'm not sure of the translation, but in English we call this "getting grounded," and it happens with what I am sure to kids seems an alarming rate and wholly arbitrary fashion.

But this wasn't just any trip, this was the Grade 6 graduation trip! To Quebec City! It was very important! Which may have been the reason Dad decided grounding daughter from it just might be serious enough to get his point across. He wouldn't sign the permission slip which Mom had already signed, so daughter went to the attorney who had been appointed to represent her interests during Mom and Dad's split and sued to get to go on the trip. A judge agreed. Daughter went on the trip. But Dad appealed the ruling, even though it was now a moot issue, maybe because he figured that as the Dad, it was his responsibility to set boundaries and rules in his house and not a judge's.

Which brings us to earlier this week and the discovery that utter silliness is not the exclusive province of Canada's lower-level judges. The Quebec Superior Court showed itself well able in that area and upheld the lower court ruling that Dad's punishment was too severe, and also said that Dad didn't have grounds to contest the decision.

The Superior Court did say that these were "very rare" circumstances and "warned the case should not be seen as an open invitation for children to take legal action every time they're grounded." Yeah, right. We all know what should have happened. The Superior Court should have said, "Get this crap outta here" and suggested that the original judge take a refresher course in exercising that dusty old quality judgment, and that the lawyer who brought the case be sent to bed without supper. We're not talking abuse. We're not talking cruelty. Had those been evident, then legal intervention would have been warranted and necessary. We're talking about getting grounded.

An old cliche is that you pay for your raising as your own kids turn out a lot like you. If this girl has kids, they're going to be something else to deal with.

Probably Quebecois judges.