Sentences with phrase «arrangements for your child down»

This means even fewer expenses for sleeping arrangements for your child down the road.

Not exact matches

If your child is under 5, and his or her name is down for entry at a local school, it would be a good idea to phone the secretary and explain that your arrangements are changing, so the name can be removed.

Arrangements for closing down unregistered schools are «inadequate» and too many children remain «at significant risk of harm», Sir Michael Wilshaw has said.

According to figures recently released by the MoJ on divorce and for making arrangements for children, there were 20,693 financial arrangements applications between January and March 2016 (down 14 % from the same quarter in 2015).

One of the oddities of family law, at least from a client's perspective, is that while the client may view «their case» in the singular, in reality, there may be several separate strands before the court, for example, the divorce (usually straightforward), financial provision (generally one application before the court, but with the potential to branch off down different routes particularly if enforcement is required), and arrangements for any children (hopefully, in most cases, capable of agreement without proceedings being issued, but sometimes not).

Where relationships between parents break down, arrangements for the care of the child and for time with his / her parents have to be resolved.

FAMILY LAW — CHILDREN — Best interests — Where both parents seek sole parental responsibility and for the child to live with them — Where the respondent mother believes the child would settle down and accept the arrangement if the court ordered for the child to spend no time with applicant father — Where the court has a statutory mandate to make parenting orders with the child's best interests as the paramount concern — Where there is little doubt that the child would benefit from having a meaningful relationship with both parents — Where the child's clear views that he does not want to spend time with the respondent mother should be given significant weight in the circumstances — Where the child is of an age, maturity and intelligence to have principally formed his own rationally based views — Where the court is satisfied that it is in the child's best interests for the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility to be rebutted — Where the respondent father is to have sole parental responsibility and the child is to live with him — Where the applicant mother is permitted to attend certain school and sporting events of the child — Where the child should be able to instigate contact with the respondent mother as he considers appropriate to his needs and circumstances — Where the orders made are least likely to lead to the institution of further proceedings in relation to the child — Where the child is to have the outcome of these proceedings, the effect of the orders and the reasons for judgment explained to him by an expert as soon as reasonably practical.

If it is impossible for you to sit down together on your own and discuss arrangements for the children, it may be that mediation would help.

The majority of Australians whose relationships break down find that they are able to make arrangements for children and property themselves, or with some help from family mediators and Family Dispute Resolution providers.

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.

There have actually been some quite recent changes to the way that Texas Child Custody Laws have been set down in the statute books, with major changes in September 2007 signalling a whole raft of over 300 different alterations that impacted on everything from child custody arrangements to visitation rights for each of the parents, and exactly how those rights would be enshrined inChild Custody Laws have been set down in the statute books, with major changes in September 2007 signalling a whole raft of over 300 different alterations that impacted on everything from child custody arrangements to visitation rights for each of the parents, and exactly how those rights would be enshrined inchild custody arrangements to visitation rights for each of the parents, and exactly how those rights would be enshrined in law.

See the research and articles at http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/) So, given that there are just not all that many options to choose from in deciding upon a child custody arrangement, and given that those options overwhelmingly will be constrained or even dictated by fairly obvious facts about the parties» circumstances such as work and school schedules, or how far apart they live from each other, and similar considerations, one really has to query what all the painstaking attention to detail and «science» (or pretext to science) is all about if, when all is said and done, the decision will boil down to the application of a default personal preference, and pragmatic ways of arranging custody and visitation schedules to accomplish this while avoiding liability for placing children into situations in which detriment too obviously or easily can be proved to be the direct result of the arrangement.