Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

Rebuttable Presumption

Add Topic
Can someone explain to me in layman's terms what was meant by

"The best interest of the child is 'A Rebuttable Presumption of Equal Shared Care'."  ????

cheers,
Dads_R_Tops said
Can someone explain to me in layman's terms what was meant by

"The best interest of the child is 'A Rebuttable Presumption of Equal Shared Care'."  ????

cheers,

You have gotten this mixed up

The term is 'a rebuttable presumption of equal (shared) responsibility' which means it has to be argued 'against'.

When the Court accepts this presumption - "equal or significant/substantial time" has to be considered.

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on this site (look for the Avatars) Be mindful what you post in public areas. 
G'day Agog,

Ok if an interim order states "That the husband and wife have equal and joint responsibility for the children…" That is the first step in gaining "Equal time" since equal time is not assumed but is an "extra" as must be argued for reasons to "additional time"?

Hence now I can push for additional time giving all the reasons under the sun to get it…

cheers,
Dads_R_Tops said
Ok if an interim order states "That the husband and wife have equal and joint responsibility for the children…" That is the first step in gaining "Equal time" since equal time is not assumed but is an "extra" as must be argued for reasons to "additional time"?

It is the first hurdle, from thereon the Courts must 'consider' equal or significant. The operative word is CONSIDER

Dads_R_Tops said
Hence now I can push for additional time giving all the reasons under the sun to get it…
"all the reasons under the sun to get it" No, you give the Court reasoned argument, which is not the same as every reason you can think of.

I suggest you carefully read Section 60CC and Section 65 of the Amended Act.

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on this site (look for the Avatars) Be mindful what you post in public areas. 

Practical Resource for Self Represented Litigants on Shared Parental Responsibility and Equal Time

See this link to a paper by Dr Tom Altobelli (who is now a Federal Magistrate) on the practical implications of the Shared Parentel Responsibility Bill changes with reference to shared parental responsibility and equal time and significant and meaningful time.

 http://www.wattsmccray.com.au/pages/news/tp-1.html

It is an EXCELLENT resource for self represented litigants and you could probably take the Judge and opposing Counsel through a well reasonsed argument of how shared parental responsibility is not rebutted and why either equal time or significant and meaningful time should apply respectively, subject to not being disqualifed.  This aint rocket science so dont be miffed by the Family Law professionals, who will always suggest you accept something less, as they dont want shared parenting because it would take away their business.

Good luck and lets get more shared parenting.
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets