Sentences with phrase «order equal parenting»

The bill amends the Divorce Act to instruct judges to order equal parenting when making a parenting order unless it is established that a different allocation would be in the best interests of the child.

If the parents can't agree on a parenting plan, the judge has no option but to order equal parenting time, regardless of the logistics.

In other cases, the court might order equal parenting time, but in all cases, courts must order parenting plans that maximize each parents parenting time with their children.

Not exact matches

In order for parents to truly be equal partners in child care, it is essential that fathers be actively involved in child care beginning when their children are born.

An order for joint custody may specify one home as the primary residence of the child and designate one parent to have sole power to make decisions regarding specific matters while both parents retain equal rights and responsibilities for other matters.

Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Robert O'Brien issued the order in response to a class - action lawsuit filed against the Compton Unified School District by parents at McKinley Elementary School alleging that the verification process violated their constitutional rights to free speech and equal opportunity.

We have the parent piece in order and believe that equal education for all children is the key to success.

107; Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972; 29 C.F.R. Part 1614; Executive Order 11478, Equal Employment Opportunity in the Federal Government; Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low - Income Populations; Executive Order 13087, Further Amendment to Executive Order 11478, Equal Employment Opportunity in the Federal Government; Executive Order 13160, Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Race, Sex, Color, National Origin, Disability, Religion, Age, Sexual Orientation, and Status as a Parent in Federally Conducted Education and Training Programs; Executive Order 13166, Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency; the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967; the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009; Title II of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008; Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) regulations governing the processing of complaints of discrimination in the Federal sector; and EEOC decisions, procedures, guidelines, and program and management directives.

Executive Order 13152 (Amendment to Executive Order 11478, Equal Employment Opportunity in Federal Government, dated May 2, 2000, amended by E.O. 12106 (Equal Pay), amended by 13087 (Sexual Orientation), and amended by Executive Order 13152 (Status of a Parent);

A trial was held and the family court entered an order awarding joint custody and equal parenting time between Father and Mother.

In 2014, parenting orders were made, which ordered equal shared parental responsibility for the children and authorized either parent to take the children on an overseas holiday subject to certain conditions being met.

Notwithstanding the custody arrangement and in addition to all rights and duties given to parents pursuant to Section 63-5-30, each parent has equal access and the same right to obtain all educational records and medical records of his or her minor children and the right to participate in the children's school activities and extracurricular activities that are held in public locations unless prohibited by an order of the court or State law.

[9] The most important provisions in the order, from my perspective, were that the defendant was required to produce to the plaintiff her monthly work schedule as soon as reasonably possible but in any event within 48 hours of receiving it; that upon receiving the defendant's work schedule the plaintiff was required to draw a calendar setting out parenting time for each parent for the coming month, the primary aim being to see that the children spend equal time with both parents if possible.

Such interim orders contained provisions stating that the plaintiff and the defendant shall have interim joint custody and guardianship, that the primary address of the children shall be the defendant's address, that for the purpose of access arrangements the plaintiff shall promptly inform the defendant of her monthly work schedule, and the defendant shall make efforts to ensure the children spend equal time with both the plaintiff and the defendant and, upon receipt of such work schedule, draw a calendar setting out parenting time for each parent for the coming month, and that the plaintiff shall be allowed to travel to Japan with the children from November 2, 2002 through November 18, 2002.

This editorial (see below) in Australia's Courier - Mail criticizes the provisions in Australia's recently - amended Family Law Act that call for equal shared parenting orders.

Yet under the Family Law amendment, judicial orders for these couples must apply a presumption that equal shared responsibility is in the best interests of a child and consequently, a judge must «favourably» consider a further order that a child spend equal time with each parent.

Former judge Tim Carmody, SC, who has returned to the private bar after serving the Family Court for five years, said the onus to apply equal shared parenting orders was part of his reason for resigning.

A very general Parenting Order may simply state that each parent has equal parenting time, meaning the child spends an equal amount of time with each parent and all decisions regarding the child are equallParenting Order may simply state that each parent has equal parenting time, meaning the child spends an equal amount of time with each parent and all decisions regarding the child are equallparenting time, meaning the child spends an equal amount of time with each parent and all decisions regarding the child are equally shared.

If the parents have joint legal custody and substantially equal periods of physical placement with the child, either parent may file a petition, motion or order to show cause for modification of the legal custody or physical placement order.

If the parent proposing the move or removal has sole legal or joint legal custody of the child and the child resides with that parent for the greater period of time or the parents have substantially equal periods of physical placement with the child, as an alternative to the petition, motion or order to show cause under par.

Parents share a joint and equal responsibility for following parenting time orders.

When there is near equal parenting time, and the custodial parent has significantly higher income than the noncustodial parent, application of the parenting time credit should result in an order for the child support to be paid from a custodial parent to a noncustodial parent, absent grounds for a deviation.

The judge ordered roughly equal parenting time, which was what J had said he wanted.

When parents can not agree on parenting arrangements judges are now commonly ordering shared equal child parenting arrangements.

-- Enabling parenting coordination by agreement or court order; — Amending the Commercial Arbitration Act to address family arbitrations; — integrating reproductive technologies into determining a child's legal parents; — Replacing the terms «custody» and «access» with «guardianship» and «parenting time»; — Defining «guardianship» through a list of «parental responsibilities» that can be allocated to allow for more customized parenting arrangements; — Extending the legislative property division regime to common - law spouses who have lived together for two years in a marriage - like relationship or who are in marriage - like relationship of some permanence and have children together; — Excluding certain types of property (e.g. pre-relationship property, gifts, and inheritances) from the pool of family property to be divided 50 - 50; and — Providing that debts are subject to equal division.

In joint custody situations, support may not be ordered at all if the parents have similar incomes and spend an equal amount of time with the child.

More and more decisions are coming down ordering equal time shared parenting.

Joint legal custody is usually ordered by the court to give parents equal say regarding important decisions made on behalf of the children.

Absent a joint custody agreement by the parents that includes an unequal physical custody arrangement, a judge is now required to order joint custody with an equal amount of parenting time, regardless of where the parent lives, unless one parent is ruled to be unfit.

Kansas courts prefer to order joint legal custody whenever possible, so divorced parents usually have equal rights to make major decisions regarding their children.

But when shared responsibility is imposed (child abuse or family violence cancels the presumption), the courts are required to consider a further order that a child spend equal time with each of the parents.

Joint legal custody is a court order that ensures each parent has an equal right in making decisions regarding routine medical issues, education, and any other area that affects the welfare of the child.

He said the onus to apply equal shared parenting orders was part of the reason he resigned from the bench in July.

Court orders entitle some noncustodial parents to equal amounts of time with the child as the custodian has.

(c) if it is, consider making an order to provide (or including a provision in the order) for the child to spend equal time with each of the parents.

After «subject to», insert «sections 61DA (presumption of equal shared parental responsibility when making parenting orders) and 65DAB (parenting plans) and».

If the parenting order provides that two or more people have equal shared parental responsibility, any decision about a major long - term issue in relation to a child must be made jointly.

FAMILY LAW — APPEAL — INTERIM PARENTING — Where there is nothing anomalous about the primary judge finding, by virtue of s 61DA (3) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)(«the Act»), that it would «not be appropriate» to apply the presumption in favour of equal shared parental responsibility, while going on to make an order for equal shared parental responsibility ¬ Where it can be seen that the primary judge addressed what was necessary from s 65DAA of the Act, given the parameters of the dispute, and how the parties» respective cases were presented — Where the primary judge adequately and appropriately considered what she is obliged to in determining where the best interests of the children lie, bearing in mind that that consideration is framed by the parameters of the issues in dispute, and how each party has presented their case — Where there is no merit in the grounds of appeal ¬ Appeal dismissed.

(a) a parenting order provides (or is to provide) that a child's parents are to have equal shared parental responsibility for the child; and

After «subject to», insert «section 61DA (presumption of equal shared parental responsibility when making parenting orders) and 65DAB (parenting plans) and».

(b) the court does not make an order (or include a provision in the order) for the child to spend equal time with each of the parents; and

(1) If a parenting order provides (or is to provide) that a child's parents are to have equal shared parental responsibility for the child, the court must:

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 you do not have a temporary custody or protective order, the other parent will have equal custodial rights until a court determines otherwise.

Less commonly, in what we will refer to as a shared custody order, the parents share primary physical custody, and the children spend nearly equal time with each parent.

Last year Kentucky passed a law making joint physical custody and equal parenting time the norm in all temporary orders before a divorce is finalized.

In order to intelligently discuss the fight over shared parenting versus equal parenting, you've got to start by understanding what each of those terms really means.

If a parent with the majority of or an equal amount of parenting time wants to move under certain circumstances, they need to obtain the agreement of the other parent or a court order.

Texas» standard possession order allows both parents to have equal possession and access while addressing a child's needs during the school year.

The CBA objects to the proposed legislation, which says equal parenting time and responsibility must be ordered in every case.