Child Arrangements on Separation – After the Shouting Stops
Having practiced in the field of Family Law for almost 28 years, I cannot help but pick up on certain trends and patterns that follow in terms of disputes concerning child arrangements on separation.
There are obviously always extreme cases where one party is saying for whatever reason there should be no contact whatsoever with the absent parent. These are individual cases to be considered on their own merits and not something I seek to dwell upon at this time. However, the vast majority of child arrangement disputes relate to the parameters, how often and how long in terms of regulating child arrangements going forward. Indeed, over the years whether it has been called access, contact or ‘shall spend time with’, the principles are the same.
One of the key fundamental mistakes made by absent parents that I have seen in circumstances of this nature is to flatly refuse to agree to any contact, unless it is along the lines of what they are looking for with regards to an overall resolution. This is despite the analogy that I often use to clients that ‘contact is like building a brick wall’. It largely depends on how advanced the ‘wall’ is as to the extent to which solicitors, or the courts need to become involved in finalising the arrangements. Those on occasion who wish for the ‘brick wall’ to be built in full before they will engage in it are frankly adopting a shortsighted approach to matters and missing the point in general.
Similar points can be made regarding a parent who has day-to-day care of children and, on occasions, an unwillingness to offer any contact of significance, unless there is absolute agreement to proposals and stipulations before such contact is to take place. Obviously, sometimes conditions can be justified and appropriate, however, other times they can be seen as unnecessarily and excessively putting up barriers to contact and more fluid and appropriate child arrangements.
The importance of a Legal Advisor to provide clear and appropriate guidance on what is justified in terms of parameters and requests and what isn’t is invaluable in times like these. Perhaps it is the case that the lawyer may not say what an individual would like to hear at times, however, most people will appreciate clearly set out legal advice if they can understand the logic behind such observations.
If not by way of direct agreement or mediation, individuals can of course find themselves in the Court arena to address these issues on a once and for all basis. This, although regrettable, can happen for wholly legitimate reasons and with no criticism to the Applicant or indeed the Respondent directly as to their positions. However, it is hoped that, as is largely the case that in most Court related applications at a First Appointment or certainly after the parties have had the benefit of reviewing the recommendations of a full report from a Court Officer, there will be some level of compromise and agreement concerning child arrangements going forward, albeit sometimes begrudgingly accepting of this. It is in circumstances where matters proceed towards a final contested hearing that more long-term damage can occur. Indeed, whilst there may be some short-term gratification out of a Barrister instructed on behalf of a parent cross-examining and undermining the position of the other party at a fully contested hearing to retrieve appropriate orders, the practical reality of matters is that, after the lawyers have gone, you are still left with two parents who need to address child arrangements going forward.
Nobody has the emotional and financial resources to address litigation continually during the life of a minor child and, at some stage, perhaps after a long drawn-out battle, there needs to be some focus towards working together. I’m not suggesting that certain couples need to be friends or go out for regular meals and days out together, however, a level of general understanding and basic communication to address welfare issues involving their children is an objective that is preferable to achieve. The evolving of family communication apps and their utilisation clearly assists with such matters.
At Bird & Lovibond we have an experienced Family Law team who understand family issues and the process involved in attending to such matters to hopefully achieve a lasting resolution for the long-term benefit of the whole family in circumstances involving child arrangements on separation.
Tony Neocleous
Director