Unlike the court’s approach to financial matters in divorce, with children, there is no starting point or “presumption” of equal time-sharing between parents. Each decision is unique and rests on what is in the best interests of the individual child.
Until very recently, the family court’s approach was to presume that the involvement of both parents would further a child’s welfare, unless such involvement was evidenced to put the child at risk of harm. This presumption, however, is set by the government to be repealed, which will see the courts depart from the starting point that dual parental involvement is positive for a child and move towards a child-centric approach from the outset.
It is yet to be seen what this change will look like in practice, as the presumption of involvement is already rebutted where evidence shows that time with both parents would not be in a child’s best interests. This decision usually relates to safeguarding or welfare concerns, which may put the child at risk of physical or emotional harm.
If there are no concerns regarding either parent’s ability to care for the child, then it is likely that the courts will still find that children will benefit from involvement with both of their parents. What level of involvement is appropriate, however, will continue to be based on the individual child, with the court having regard to the welfare checklist. Involvement can range from indirect time, through letters and/or video calls, all the way through to direct time on an equal shared care basis.
What about if there are no concerns about either parent’s ability to care for the child, but the children have traditionally spent more time with one parent? Does this set the tone for the future arrangements?
When parents separate, it is inevitable that the arrangements which were in place will change. Just because one parent has taken a greater role in the day-to-day care of the children does not necessarily mean that this will continue. However, it is often appropriate for the arrangements to include a gradual increase in time with the other parent, so that the children can be eased into the change in their routine. The pace of this progression is specific to the circumstances and the needs of the children in question. Where appropriate, this progression can lead to a build-up of time, eventually resulting in the children spending equal time with each parent.
What does a “joint lives with order” or a “shared lives with order” mean?
These types of orders are often made by the court to recognise the importance of both parents and to put them on an equal footing, both to one another, and from the children’s perspective as well.
Just because the children will be spending more time with one parent than the other, this does not mean that a joint lives with or shared lives with order cannot be made. This type of order has been made even in cases where the children spend 2/14 nights with one parent during the term-time, and half of the holidays.
As well as offering a symbolic message to the family about both parents’ roles being of equal importance, these types of orders also permit a parent to travel abroad for up to 28 days without the other parent’s consent (within their scheduled time). This helps avoid issues with seeking consent to travel abroad.
These types of orders are not suitable in every case, but where they are, they operate as a helpful tool to achieve important balance and respect in co-parenting relationships.
How can Porter Dodson help?
If you have any questions about shared care and whether this is suitable for your children and family circumstances, our specialist family lawyers can advise and support you throughout the entire process. Get in touch to discuss your situation.
Get in touch
