I thank the members opposite for packaging this notion of a type of relationship that constitutes the circumstances of a battered spouse syndrome. I don't see it as an either-or matter, though.
I'm wondering, Ms. Klineberg, if you could help us here. I'm not married to this particular substitute. I've been persuaded that keeping “relationship” there.... We may have to change the French to accommodate it. Do you have any suggestions on how we could ensure the purpose behind this amendment on “interaction or communication between the parties”?
I don't see where else it's covered, other than among other factors. I would like to see that notion there somewhere. I'm not convinced by Mr. Seeback's argument that any relationship is broad enough to cover the bullying. There may be a history of one or two incidents of somebody making threats, and this could be important in someone's reaction at a later time. Can you help us with that? Do you have any suggestions?