Sentences with phrase «arrangements for children following»

Making arrangements for children following separation can be challenging for all sorts of reason.

Bill C - 560 would amend the Divorce Act to direct the courts to make equal shared parenting the presumptive arrangement for children following the divorce of their parents, except in proven cases of abuse or neglect.

Not exact matches

They often include provisions about religious practices for the couple and for any children who may arrive; whether or not they plan to have children; what they will do in the case of a pregnancy not wanted by one or the other; what will happen if the couple decides to separate; what the financial arrangements will be in such a case; what provision will be made for the children; how in - laws, relatives, and friends will be included in the relationship; what sexual practices will be followed; under what circumstances the couple will move from one home to another; whose job will take precedence; and what kinds of freedom each partner is to have.

Ideally, to follow this method, you should let your child guide the co sleeping arrangement as much as possible and understand that your little one will be ready for his or her own «big kid bed» when the time is right.

However, although not having automatic rights grandparents can apply for permission to apply for a Child Arrangements Order, the courts will consider the following: • Their connection with the child /Child Arrangements Order, the courts will consider the following: • Their connection with the child /child / ren.

The other projects selected are: conservation covenants; electoral law, talking account of technological advances; electronic communications code; European contract law; family financial orders following divorce and enforcing financial arrangements for children; offences against the person; rights to light in connection with planning law and land development; the regulation of taxis and private hire vehicles; trademark and design litigation; and the law of wildlife management.

Immediately following the trial, the parties made arrangements for CPS to take the child from the foster parents.

We specialize in the following solutions: ● Child custody agreements ● Child support arrangements ● Visitation rights for fathers ● Joint custody agreements ● Restraining orders to protect fathers

Examples of recent cases include successfully defending a mother against allegations she had smothered and killed two of her children and applying for a reporting restriction order in the same case, defending parents in several cases where they were alleged to have caused death by shaking, defending a mother in a case where she was alleged to have caused multiple fractures, representing the local authority in a case where foster parents wished to prevent an adoption, representing a father in proceedings following an informal surrogacy arrangement, and representing a father who was alleged to have tampered with life - preserving equipment being used by his infant daughter.

Family Mediation services including help with arrangements for children and child maintenance post separation; settlement of financial issues and property and accommodation issues following relationship breakdown so that families can achieve legal separation.

Following the birth, there remains a role for family courts to play in setting legal parameters that protect the safety of unmarried mothers and their children through supervised visitation arrangements and legal enforcement services.

Father's interpretation: Son understands what is fair and loves both parents equally; his problems at school and with friends are natural for children following divorce and have nothing to do with the time - sharing arrangements; the arrangements should remain as they are.

Collaborative Law is worth considering if some or all of the following are true for you: (a) you want a civilized, rational resolution of the issues, (b) you would like to keep open the possibility of a viable working relationship with your partner down the road, (c) you and your partner will be raising children together and you want the best working relationship possible, (d) you want to protect your children from the harm associated with litigation between parents, (e) you have ethical or spiritual beliefs that place high value on taking personal responsibility for handling conflicts with integrity, (f) you value control and autonomous decision making and do not want to hand over decisions about restructuring your financial and parenting arrangements to a stranger (a judge), (g) you recognize the restricted and often unpredictable range of outcomes and «rough justice» generally available in the public court system and want a more creative and individualized range of choices available to you and your spouse or partner for resolving the issues.

This is a term used to refer to applications made following separation or divorce about the arrangements for children, such as where they will live and who they will spend time with.

Further, as respecting possible modification, because of past issues of the defendant failing to comply with orders of the court; providing token compliance with orders of the court while ignoring the spirit and intent of the orders (including the orders dated December 1, 2010); the defendant's lengthy pattern of contemptuous conduct; the expenses and financial waste caused by the defendant; the substantial financial drain on the resources of the plaintiff and the guardian ad litem caused by the defendant; the pattern of parental alienation; prior false reports of abuse and / or neglect to governmental entities; and the need for repose on the part of the minor child, it is anticipated that in addition to satisfaction of the foregoing conditions, no modification motion is permitted to be filed by defendant regarding the sole physical and / or sole legal custody arrangements, except in the case of the plaintiff's total and permanent disability as determined by the Social Security Administration, unless the following conditions are satisfied...» Eisenlohr v. Eisenlohr, 2011 WL 1566201 at * 4 (Conn.Super.).

There is a consensus that the following principles should guide the legal determination of parenting after divorce: (1) shared parenting as an optimal arrangement for the majority of children of divorce, and in their best interests.

Joe and Ann (not their real names) came to mediation in order to sort out their finances, property and parenting arrangements for their two children following their separation.

This means that formal legal arrangements (for example court orders) for regular child maintenance payments can be enforced if any of the following apply:

Additionally, our Supreme Court noted Pennsylvania courts require the following considerations in relocation cases: (1) the economic and other potential advantages of the move; (2) the likelihood the move would substantially improve the quality of life for the custodial parent and the children and is not the result of a whim of the custodial parent; (3) the motives behind the parent's reasons for seeking or opposing the move; and (4) the availability of a realistic substitute visitation arrangement that will adequately foster an ongoing relationship between the non-custodial parent and the children.

It must follow that all of those costs must be the «increased costs of the shared custody arrangements» because the Guidelines in their basic design assumed that the access parent formerly had absolutely no costs at all for the child.

So far from these topics being off - limits, any MHP seeking appointment in a court case needs to fully inform the parties prior to their consent [123], of information about the following kinds of potentials for bias and agenda: whether the MHP has been married or divorced, and how many times, and under what kinds of circumstances, and how the MHP currently feels about those events; whether, if divorced, the MHP went through litigation over custody or property, and such details as whether the MHP had problems paying or receiving child support, as well as the custody arrangements of the MHP's own children and how these worked out and everyone's feelings about them; the MHP's own personal experience taking care of and spending time with children, within and without the scope of «parenting», and with regard to parenting, whether that was parenting as a primary caregiver, married or single parent, with or without household and third party help, or as a working parent or stay - home parent, and for how many children, and for how long, and the outcomes from all of that; i.e. how much time has this person actually spent caring for children on his or her own, and how well did this person's own family systems function, and is this person in fact an «expert» in creating a functioning family and raising happy, healthy, successful children with good outcomes, nay «best» outcomes, thoroughly well - adjusted and having reached the very pinnacles of their innate potential.

In making an equitable apportionment of marital property, the family court must give weight in such proportion as it finds appropriate to all of the following factors: (1) the duration of the marriage along with the ages of the parties at the time of the marriage and at the time of the divorce; (2) marital misconduct or fault of either or both parties, if the misconduct affects or has affected the economic circumstances of the parties or contributed to the breakup of the marriage; (3) the value of the marital property and the contribution of each spouse to the acquisition, preservation, depreciation, or appreciation in value of the marital property, including the contribution of the spouse as homemaker; (4) the income of each spouse, the earning potential of each spouse, and the opportunity for future acquisition of capital assets; (5) the health, both physical and emotional, of each spouse; (6) either spouse's need for additional training or education in order to achieve that spouse's income potential; (7) the non marital property of each spouse; (8) the existence or nonexistence of vested retirement benefits for each or either spouse; (9) whether separate maintenance or alimony has been awarded; (10) the desirability of awarding the family home as part of equitable distribution or the right to live therein for reasonable periods to the spouse having custody of any children; (11) the tax consequences to each or either party as a result of equitable apportionment; (12) the existence and extent of any prior support obligations; (13) liens and any other encumbrances upon the marital property and any other existing debts; (14) child custody arrangements and obligations at the time of the entry of the order; and (15) such other relevant factors as the trial court shall expressly enumerate in its order.