As many here have suggested, this kind of maximum contact approach can work if there's goodwill on both sides and open lines of communication. As Patfrench mentioned in her last post, and as I gathered from her report of what her solicitor had suggested, this is not the case here. A solicitor would only advise the limited visitation option if certain conditions were present in the parents' relationship, and I think Patfrench has confirmed those conditions for us in her last post above.
When you're dealing with a man who has been something of a jerk during your relationship, that behaviour usually continues after the split up, and occasions when contact is necessary become opportunities for someone with jerklike tendencies to be true to their nature. So the less contact and the less chances there are for aggravation, the better, because it's not good for children to witness their mother being treated badly.
The idea that all fathers are created equal and one size visitation arrangements should fit all is a fallacy. A good father does not mistreat the mother of his children.
(In my own case, my exH had 17 years to get his parenting act together, and failed miserably. He remains unable to supervise homework, to cook a meal that is edible (three episodes of food poisoning of the children in 6 months prove that), or to deal with problems that come up without resorting to threats and angry outbursts. He is welcome to phone them any time, but chooses not to, for whatever reason. They are also able to phone him any time, but choose not to for whatever reason.
Even without all of that, he can't change his work hours to pick anyone up from the two schools they attend. He could not ferry them around to their various activities in the afternoon and evening.)