of damage sought by the appellant is fundamentally incalculable
and not recoverable in tort has particular force in the circumstances of this case, namely, where a father claims damages as
against a mother for the emotional and/or economic costs associated with the rearing of a healthy child.
 There is no determinative precedent in Canada respecting
a claim by one or other parent against a third party for involuntary parenthood involving a healthy child and that issue is not
before us in this case. However, the incalculability of any
purported loss is particularly acute where the claim is made not
by the parents as against a third party, but by one parent as
against the other parent with whom he shares equally the legal
and moral responsibility of maintaining the child. As I will discuss
further below, to award damages in this case would be contrary to
the spirit and purpose of Ontario’s statutory family law regime.
(b) The irrelevance of fault in Ontario’s custody and
child support regime
 As I have noted above, this is not a claim being advanced
by unwilling parents as against a third party. Rather, it is a claim
being advanced by the unwilling father against the mother, who
does not claim to be an involuntary parent and who has willingly
taken on the responsibility of raising the child. In effect, the
father is claiming that, to the extent that he views the birth as a
disadvantage to himself — emotionally, professionally and/or
financially — the mother, who has agreed to raise the child, must
compensate him. Presumably, the more time and resources the
appellant devotes to the child, the more his income and career will
suffer and the more the respondent will have to pay.
 It is to be hoped that the appellant will, as the child’s
father, contribute to the child’s upbringing in a positive way. It is
also hoped that he will see this contribution as being pleasurable
and positive. If, however, he views it only in a negative light,
I see no basis on which to impose liability on the mother for any
net negative impact the appellant may consider that he has
suffered due to his having fathered the child and contributed to
his or her upbringing.
 To allow the appellant to recover damages as against the
respondent for the unwanted birth in the circumstances of this
Compensation in Wrongful Conception” (2012), 2(1) Westminster L. Rev.
73-96; N.M. Priaulx, “Damages for the ‘Unwanted’ Child: Time for a
Rethink?” (2005) 73 Medico-Legal Journal 152-63; B. Feldthusen,
“Supressing Damages”, supra.