Here's a newsflash: the family law system in Ontario is fragmented, complex, slow, expensive, inaccessible and filled with self-represented people. All of the above are well-known to family law lawyers and users of the system. These observations form the basis of an Interim Report released in February 2012, by the Law Reform Commission of Ontario ("LRCO"). The report, Towards A More Efficient and Responsive Family Law System, provides s ome potentially breakthrough recommendations for not just efficiency tweaks, but a whole new approach to helping families with family law problems in Ontario.

There's an old proverb that says "It takes a village to raise a child". While the source of this proverb may be lost to time, the wisdom behind it has lived on because it has a ring of truth to it; with more sources of experience, care, and wisdom, it seems intuitive that a child will flourish. The same logic could be applied to children with more than two parents. That said, when a village is in a civil war it is unlikely that child-rearing will be a priority, and this is particularly evident for children being raised in the "civil war" of family law, namely divorce. With the rise of blended families and developments in reproductive technology, family law is seeing greater numbers of children who have more than two parents, and while the children may enjoy the benefits of several parents caring for them, when it comes down to divorce it looks like having more parents only adds fuel to the fire.

Family law has a new frontier. The long-overdue extension of the institution of marriage to same-sex couples and the evolution of reproductive technology are forcing courts to answer questions that have never been asked before. Case in point: the recent British Columbia Supreme Court decision of J.C.M. v. A.N.A., 2012 BCSC 584.

The lesbian couple in J.C.M. v. A.N.A. was not married, but they were in a common-law relationship that lasted four years. The names of the parties have not been released in an effort to protect their identities, so for the sake of clarity, let us call them Anna and Bella. Anna and Bella wanted to start a family together, so they purchased vials of sperm, called "straws", for $250.00 each from a sperm bank in the United States.

When considering one's Will and estate plan, one usually thinks of living to old age.

But accidents happen. The unexpected and unanticipated can lead to disaster.

If you are thinking about a Will, ask yourself some or all of the following questions:

• Does your current Will reflect your wishes?
• Are gifts (bequests) provided to take care of promises you have made?
• Are the bequests funded, or are they to be paid for out of the residue of the estate?
• If a specific asset has been mentioned as a gift, does it still exist?
• Are your executors/attorneys willing and able to carry on their responsibilities?
• Have you named guardians to take care of your children, and are they willing to take on this role?
• Are there other family members who might challenge the named guardians?
• Have you addressed the ongoing financial needs of your dependents, especially the need for income?
• Are the liquidity needs of your estate addressed; for example, to pay debts, capital gains, taxes and funeral costs?

To be a valid legal document a Last Will and Testament must be executed properly, that is; signed in accordance with the requirements of the Succession Law Reform Act (Ontario).

The formal requirements for a valid Will are:

(a) the Will must be in writing;
(b) a Will must be signed at its end by the testator or some other person in his presence and by his direction;
(c) the testator makes or acknowledges his signature in the presence of two or more attesting witnesses, both present at the same time;
(d) two or more attesting witnesses subscribe the Will in the presence of the testator.

Most people, after having separated from their spouse, divided their property, and negotiated a Separation Agreement, would be happy to never see their former spouse again. But every so often the stars align, and two people who were just a few months shy of their divorce order have a change of heart and decide to reconcile. Some of them live happily ever after. Others realize that they made a mistake and are left having to navigate the murky waters of separation all over again; but this time they have the added obstacle of a Separation Agreement to contend with. The question of what effect reconciliation has on the enforceability of spousal support and property equalization terms in a Separation Agreement is a little tricky to answer because decisions can be so fact-specific. Nevertheless, the general rule is that reconciliation usually terminates a prior Separation Agreement.