Sentences with phrase «of shared custody arrangements»

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.

Paragraph 9 (b) stipulates that one of the factors to consider is «the increased costs of shared custody arrangements».

S. 9 of the FCSG — if one spouse has the right to access or custody of child for 40 % or more of time over the year, quantum of support based on amount set out in table, increased cost of shared custody arrangement and condition, means, needs and other circumstances of each spouse and of the children;

Not exact matches

Depending on how you arrived at sharing joint physical custody with your ex, you may not be thinking about the «rewards» of this child custody arrangement has to offer.

This aspect of divorce, at least in their situation, actually makes me jealous of divorced parents and shared custody arrangements.

(Y) oung adults who lived in sole - custody arrangements expressed more feelings of loss and more often viewed their lives through the lens of divorce, compared to those young adults who grew up in more shared physical custody arrangements.

Shared parenting is simply a collaborative arrangement in which both parents share custody of their children.

In a joint custody arrangement, parents share custody of their child, as opposed to sole custody, where one parent has full custody.

Evaluators also might help you reach an out of court settlement by sharing their informed opinion about what custody arrangement seems best to them.

Divorced parents provide care to their children in any number of ways, from the traditional custody / visitation arrangement to more equitable shared custody plans.

More and more often however, parents have been pursuing shared parenting arrangements instead of fighting for sole custody of the child.

Iowa law requires that the court must consider the best interest of the child and order a custody arrangement that will give the child the chance for maximum continuing physical and emotional contact with both parents after the parents have separated and dissolved the marriage, and which will encourage parents to share the rights and responsibilities of raising the child unless physical harm or significant emotional harm to the child, other children, or a parent is likely to occur.

In the case of sole custody, the other parent may still be allowed some visitation, though it will be much more limited than in a shared legal custody / physical custody arrangement.

You've met, things are going swimmingly and your date nights have been neatly scheduled on the kid - free occasions which are a feature of modern shared - custody arrangements.

Courts assume that in shared custody arrangements each parent pays for a considerable percentage of child - related expenses while the kids are with them.

While parents who have a shared parenting arrangement will also generally have joint custody, the reverse is not always true: joint custody is often ordered in the absence of shared parenting.

The rules say that shared physical custody, regardless of «legal custodial arrangements,» is an appropriate reason for deviation.

Although no federal laws specifically address custody, parental responsibility, visitation or time - sharing issues in military divorces, these issues are often made more challenging because service members» obligations to their jobs require extra flexibility and creativity in creating parenting plans and time - sharing arrangements that will work for both parents as well as serve the best interests of the children.

These results may be a function of Alberta's generally more conservative political and social values but are more likely a consequence of the geographic separation of parents owing to lengthy periods of site - based work in the oil patch or the interprovincial relocation of separated parents to take work in the province, making shared custody arrangements difficult if not impossible to implement.

There are a variety of ways to share parenting time, but the guidelines calculate support differently if the parents share equal time (meaning, the child lives with each parent 50 % of the time), close to equal time (where the child stays with the non-custodial parent between 143 and 183 nights a year) or have a split custody arrangement (where the parents divide the kids between them — mom takes the older child while dad has the younger child, for example).

But the shared custody arrangement will reduce the impact of ongoing child care upon the recipient's employment prospects, such that progress towards self - sufficiency should occur more quickly.

For example a spouse with significant income in a shared custody arrangement of one child has more to gain from this credit than a spouse with little to no taxable income.

Physical custody, on the other hand, relates to the time sharing arrangement of the children.

Time - sharing, parenting plans, and shared parental responsibilities are terms that are commonly used by courts to ensure that the custody arrangement does not alienate one parent in favor of the other.

Nonetheless, in this case the court made some complex mathematical adjustments to support; this included an adjustment to account for the fact that, before the parties started their shared parenting arrangement, the mother had sole custody of the child and was legally entitled to receive appropriate child support from the father for that period.

In reality, shared custody is a type of access arrangement, and does not have anything to do with which parent has legal decision - making power.

[13] He considered (1) the existing shared parenting arrangement and the relationship between the children and Ms. G; (2) the existing shared parenting arrangement and the relationship between the children and Mr. S; (3) the desirability of maximizing contact between the children and both parents; (4) the views of the children, which had not been canvassed; (5) Ms. G's reason for moving; (6) the disruption to the children of a change in custody; (7) the disruption to the children consequent on removal from family, schools, and community; and (8) various other factors, such as Mr. S's economic stability, the importance of the paternal grandparents, the location of the proposed residence at Moyie Lake on a leased lot at an RV park, the girls» relationship with Mr. G and his children, and Ms. G's inflexibility.

Instead of each parent sharing the decision - making for their child in every respect as in a traditional joint custody arrangement, in a parallel parenting regime, parents assume full decision - making responsibility for different domains.

In reaching an appropriate child support figure, the court must consider the overall situation of shared custody, the costs to each parent of the arrangement and the overall needs, resources and situation of each parent.

In T.K. the Court of Appeal recognizes that it is more problematic to extend «respect» to the stated reasons for a move in cases where there has been no previous determination with respect to custody, or where there is a pre-existing joint custody order or de facto joint custody / shared residency arrangement.

After considering the jurisprudence with respect to the double - bind question, the Court found that the risk of it resulting in a presumptive disposition may be greater where a joint custody or shared residency arrangement requiring both parents to reside in the same locale is in the best interests of the child.

A general definition was developed in several decisions by the California District Courts of Appeal, in the years following Burgess holding that a shared custody arrangement exists if the noncustodial parent had physical custody at least 40 % of the time.

However, where the parents have a shared custodial arrangement, the trial court was required to make a full redetermination of what custody order was in the best interests of the children.

The two primary types of legal custody, which is determined either by agreement between parents or by order of a judge, are joint legal custody, which is an arrangement where both parents share the rights to make the major decisions for their child, and sole legal custody, which is when one parent can make these decisions without input from the other parent.

In recent years, the label of shared / joint physical custody has become more commonly used in describing a parenting arrangement; however, actual 50 - 50 sharing of the child is still NOT the norm or most common parenting plan the court adopts or that parents choose.

In such a scenario, joint custody pertains only to a sharing of the decision - making responsibilities whereas physical care is determinative of the living arrangements.

There are different kinds of physical custody arrangements, including sole, in which one parent has physical custody, and shared, in which each parent has physical custody for part of the time.

Joint physical custody is a shared physical custody arrangement of the children, where the intention is that the children spend significant periods of time with each parent, such as alternating weeks between mother and father.

Support may also be reduced in cases of extended parenting time, such as in shared custody arrangements.

A parent who shares legal custody of his child with the child's other parent must also share decision - making rights unless their custody arrangement specifies otherwise.

Under a shared custody arrangement, the child does not necessarily spend an equal amount of time with each parent.

Below, we're going to detail a bit of the history of divorce and custody and the specifics of why Florida defaults to shared custody arrangements except in very specific situations, such as when one parent is involved in drugs, domestic violence, or other criminal activities.

Ohio courts generally prefer joint legal custody arrangements, in which parents share decision - making authority but one parent provides the child's primary place of residence.

There are a variety of joint custody arrangements available, but — at minimum — joint custody means parents share in decision - making regarding the child.

Because of this, be cautious in describing your custody arrangement if you are thinking of sharing custody of a child or children.

Further, if the parent ordered to pay support has at least 30 percent of the overnights with the child under a custody order, it is considered a shared custody arrangement and the court has discretion to reduce the obligation to account for any support provided directly by that parent during overnight visitation.

These cases hinge on whether the parties actually share physical custody of the child; a joint legal custody arrangement with one party acting as the primary physical custodian is not generally sufficient to invoke this higher standard of review.

Once all of the factors have been considered, the Court social worker's report has been reviewed, and the Guardian ad Litem has been consulted, the Court can order or the parties can agree to two (2) kinds of custody arrangements: sole custody or shared parenting.

Regarding the well being of kids with divorced parents, the debate over what kind of custody arrangement is best rages on, but the Swedish study goes against some current thinking that kids in shared - custody routines are exposed to more stress due to constantly moving back and forth and the social disruption that can come along with it.

... [W] e firmly believe that the lower court must make flexible application of a Melzer type formula allowing for those anomalies inherent in shared custody arrangements...» Thus, as an alternative to the offset formula method or the downward deviation method, a Melzer needs analysis might be another method for determining child support in shared custody situations.