Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

Shared Care 3 yr old

Can anyone point me towards any precedents where shared care has been awarded for a child who is 3? Father always had contact, every 2nd weeknd for 2 night and 2 mid week visits (not overnight). Mother has had avo taken out on father and stopped contact.

Father is going to fight AVO.

General thoughts - should he fight for shared care or start with less care and increase as child gets older?
Here's a case where equal time was ordered for a 2 year old, after the mother had relocated.

Note that the court commented that a child of that age is "obviously too young to express any views".

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/FMCAfam/2008/1283.html
I am not inspired by precedents. Work out what is desirable by the party, and what that party believes is suitable for their children, and put it before the Court.

Always fight an AVO, never take an undertaking if offered by any Court as an alternative to a ful hearing. Your permanent reputation is on the line, and a lazy Justice may later use the AVO as an excuse to overlook other arrangements that are conflicted such as the needs of the child to have their parent.

If I did not agree with an AVO and found it to be seriously intrusive or impairing an existing arrangement, I would ask the Court to make the taker of the AVO pay for a third party to be involved in the usual child exchanges. It was their choice to make things more costly. Offereto go to counselling or mediation with them if they do not immediately agree to pay for the extra costs of becoming more distant to each other at a time when you are both heavily engaged in parenting.

I spend more time squashing precedents raised by others, distincting the precedent from the case at hand, then I ever have using them.

And I happen to have learnt over the years that one can if clever and powerful(cashed-up), create a false precendent in one case to be then applied to a second case, all done for the purpose of winning the second case..ie,,precedents are open to criminal manipulation.

I think I have always felt that if a matter is good enough to be heard in a Court as its own case, then it is good enough that the matter shall be judged as its own case, without outside influence.
Isy,
Your post contains a great deal of nonsense.
isy said
I am not inspired by precedents. Work out what is desirable by the party, and what that party believes is suitable for their children, and put it before the Court.
Unfortunately for you the Courts work on Case Law and Precedents. Do you think that the Court can ignore Case Law arguments put by one side?
isy said
Always fight an AVO, never take an undertaking if offered byany Court as an alternative to a ful hearing. Your permanent reputation is on the line, and a lazy Justice may later use the AVO as an excuse to overlook other arrangements that are conflicted such as the needs of the child to have their parent.

If I did not agree with an AVO and found it to be seriously intrusive or impairing an existing arrangement, I would ask the Court to make the taker of the AVO pay for a third party to be involved in the usual child exchanges. It was their choice to make things more costly. Offereto go to counselling or mediation with them if they do not immediately agree to pay for the extra costs of becoming more distant to each other at a time when you are both heavily engaged in parenting.
What is this doing in this forum? Please read the forum description
isy said
I spend more time squashing precedents raised by others, distincting the precedent from the case at hand, then I ever have using them.
Obviously? you are not talking about the Family Court because elsewhere you have stated you have been involved in Family Law for 6 years. This forum is for Family Law!
isy said
And I happen to have learnt over the years that one can if clever and powerful(cashed-up), create a false precendent in one case to be then applied to a second case, all done for the purpose of winning the second case..ie,,precedents are open to criminal manipulation.
A false precedent  is this your invention?
isy said
I think I have always felt that if a matter is good enough to be heard in a Court as its own case, then it is good enough that the matter shall be judged as its own case, without outside influence.
Does not matter a damn what you feel, what matters is the person making the decisions, either the Judge or an FM. In case you do not know, the Family Courts are Civil Courts operating on Common Law principles not Civil Code principles.

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on this site (look for the Avatars) Be mindful what you post in public areas. 
I don't know much about recent events at the Famly Court, but often I find that some things said to be new, have been around for ages. Some of what occurs in Court happens because people don't realise they have given a form of consent. Just because your opposition hands up a previous case does not mean that you must accept it, and especally if it appears to you as different or not producing an outcome acceptable to you, then I think it may be important for the Judge to be told that. Afterall, you may get lucky and can get a judge to give more thought to the personal elements of your court case .

Plenty of law is a bartering situation, just not admitted as such. And tactics change outcomes. I have not been one to accept what is put forward by an opposition if they have already been acting in a problematic, unlawful or nasty fashion. Blindly accepting any document handed up can cause one to be left out. But, people would like to have an idea of what they should expect if they go to Court.

Is there any material available to the public and provided by govt they assists people as to what to expect at Court, and as to what course of action they should take throughout the many situatons they could end up in after seperation? (ie., apart from case-law )
isy said
I don't know much about recent events at the Family Court,

Then why continue to make comments as if you do?
knowing about family law is not the same as knowing about the family court nor the law act. I am learning some about what is currently happening about the Family Court and the Federal Magistrates Court via this forum. But, I do find comedy in how some seem to think some things are new when they have been problems for years. And, I like hearing how, (if true) the new shared parenting approach is working easly or not.
I admit to not have aspired to the great resourced knowledge of the participants in this conversation, not even making it into a full court case but only to directional hearing so I am not a vast source of knowledge.

I believe debraesq's question was fair relating to what could be presented in court to help encourage a fair decision by a matriarch via proper procedure, most who read this topic will be looking for experienced guidance of how they may also present  information to assist accreditation of their case.  No doubt if this interaction was between two lawyers the other lawyer is duty bound to find another president that foreshadows the one presented and that must be considered, perhaps this is why debraesq's asks for " anyone " and " general thoughts " to make the case presentable, with merit and generally logical towards the childs best interests.

Misdirection of advice can leaver those in need very confused so perhaps rather than highlighting the negatives we could try and put some positive information that can be used by all sunder.

There is no problem with personal opinion as long as this is stated and as such and not advice from a notary form.

Information regarding in how best to deal with fighting the A.V.O. and how to gain reliable information with regards to precedent.

My general thoughts debraesq is what I have always advised parents in this situation to start slow and aim for shared care at pre-school or school age.  This being mainly because of the at a young age they do interact more with mum or dad as a main entity.

Thanks D4E. I have chatted with the father recently who said they are attending mediation this week I think - his lawyer has advised asking for shared care on a fortnightly basis, father doesn't want to do this as he feels the child is too young to have such extended periods of time away from either of his parents…

Hopefully parents will agree on something, they had a very good plan in place that has gone out the window and now the child is the one suffering as he doesn't see dad as often…

Thank you for the precedents Sunnyside, I did not get to read them myself but forwarded them onto the father..
I have to admit I cringed at week about when my daughter was three preferring 3/4 4/3 over two weeks but her mother insisted on week about because staggered days would interfere with her life too much, my daughter started becoming accustom to week about in grade 2 I guess but adapted to it at 3.

I have to agree seeing dad does make a big difference and these stupid games that are played can have far reaching effects, even now my daughter becomes over concerned about things, perhaps she knows more than I though.
I can see week about having advantages but his lawyer wants to ask for fortnight at a time - I think that is way to much time away from either parent.. Especially for a 3 year old.

The dad did have fairly extensive contact with the child so I am hoping common sense will prevail and she will allow more contact. He will take it to court if need be. I don't think the contact they had before is now possible due to the situation but he is now limited to 4 hours on a Saturday when he was having 2 2 hour visits during the week (at her house) and every 2nd weekend from Fri night till Sunday afternoon at his house.

The child does not know any different as parents separated when he was only a couple of months old so this has been a massive disruption to what he has known his whole life.
debraesq said
I can see week about having advantages but his lawyer wants to ask for fortnight at a time - I think that is way to much time away from either parent.. Especially for a 3 year old.
I will be amazed if he gets it. It is way to long for a child so young to be away from the other parent. Frequent shorter length contact is best for such a  young infant. Even week about is hard at such a young age. Certainly it has to be frequent and if the parents cooperated that could happen but experience shows they do not and thus it is more difficult.
debraesq said
The dad did have fairly extensive contact with the child so I am hoping common sense will prevail and she will allow more contact. He will take it to court if need be. I don't think the contact they had before is now possible due to the situation but he is now limited to 4 hours on a Saturday when he was having 2 2 hour visits during the week (at her house) and every 2nd weekend from Fri night till Sunday afternoon at his house….
The 4 hours on a  Saturday is not appropriate and it should be far more extensive than that. I would be heading to the FRC and then on to court if an agreement cannot be reached that has a far more sensible approach than that. But sensible and separating couples often does not go in the same sentence.


Executive Secretary - Shared Parenting Council of Australia
 Was my post helpful? If so, please let others know about the FamilyLawWebGuide whenever you see the opportunity
 
I am looking ata case of Carpenter and carpenter which is supportive of shared care

can anyone tell me if this has been used sucessfully recently or if has been challenged at all

Thanks

"When there is no enemy within, the enemies outside can not hurt you"
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets