DoubtingBro: I guess when I read visitation rights, I see that as something legally enforceable. I didn't realize that grandparents had the ability to legally to see a grandchild with the same enforcement as a parent. I was always under the assumption that parents had complete control over who their kids spent time with.
A Family Court in Canada is going to take a look at what precedents have been set. What is important to the court is what is "usual" for the child. So, in this case, whether the grandparents had a "legal" right to see the child because of their biological connection would be secondary to what was already a common practice in that child's life.
The history of the case is such that a pattern of visitation had already been established. At that point, the legalities of the grandparents' biological right to visitation is secondary. They were already a part of the child's life, with the consent and cooperation of the mother. What is at issue in this case is the circumstances and reasons for the breakdown in an established relationship.
I believe that anybody can apply for visitation rights to a minor child, if it is proven to the courts that they are an integral part of that child's life and will have a positive influence on the child's future. You don't have to be a grandparent or even biologically related to a child to have legal visitation rights established in a court of law. But you also have to prove that not being able to continue in established contact with the child will have a detrimental effect on the child's future or well being.
