What does this mean in court order ?!?

[NowWhat2023]

Trying to get an understanding of a specific part of my CAO order. I have contacted a few solicitors and almost a week later I haven’t had any come back to me. It is as follows:

‘until child is in full time school such weeks shall be taken separately and upon child being settled in their first year at school father shall be able to take weeks consecutively’

I have posted before but just wanted to see if I can get an answer.

Sounds like they are talking abouts holidays... father's weeks should be one at a time and after the child is settled at school they can be upped to 2+ weeks at a time.

Yeah I agree with previous poster, it means once child settled in school the father can have multiple consecutive weeks

Only one week at a once before school. More than one week at once permitted when settled at school. I would wonder what 'settled in first year' actually means, how is that judged?

This is the thing. Ex reads it as once dc is simply attending school/completed their first year.. I’m very much of the mind that it’s once they’re settled in school.

Our DC has autism which was diagnosed 2yrs after the final order was made, so there are things within the order that I think need to be changed especially as he has been messing around with it to suit himself. But he wants to argue over the above statement and believes he it’s very clear that it means once dc completes their first year. I’ve said it’s ambiguous at best.. but given the ‘being settled in’ part none of that can mean completed

I would consider it to be after completing first year. What have school said about her settling in at school? Why does he want consecutive weeks (eg. for specific holiday or to reduce travel time if he lives a distance away)

You could look to vary the order if you really don't think it is in your child's best interest.

I think that your ex’s interpretation is reasonable but the order seems to be written with a NT child in mind. I agree that settled is too ambiguous - child might show different behaviours with each parent and school so settled is hard to judge.

I agree it’s likely to mean at the end of reception year. If there are new circumstances to take in to account and you think the order needs changing you must take it back to court. Try mediation first though.

Settled could mean a week into the school year.

is the debate just over when holidays with dad can transition from one week to two weeks?

I would think it would mean a lot sooner than after the first school year. There is similar wording in my friends agreement and in that case it ended up going ahead in the November after child started school in September, so 2 months. That was classed as “settling in” to school for the purposes of the agreement as in the child was used to the new routine of school x

So the weeks it is referring to is to the summer holidays. And the weeks are going from 1 week to 3 weeks consecutively.

@BoohooWoohoo it was written with an NT child in mind, DC didn’t get a diagnosis until 2yrs after the final hearing. It was also made when DC was 2yrs old.

@Mrsttcno1 so this refers to summer holidays. And I think with the use of the wording ‘upon child being settled in their first year of school’.

@Collaborate as I read it as so long as dc is settled in the first year it is to progress to consecutive weeks. But there are things I believe need to be changed because of dc diagnosis.. I have suggested mediation but my ex has refused and said he isn’t interested in discussing it. I was waiting to get legal advice before I replied to him.

@Ponderingwindow it isn’t the only debate. DC shows anxiety at school, not unusual for ND children and at home, ex says DC doesn’t show any anxiety while with him. However he had a speech therapist work with our DC and their speech was worse while at my exs - her report was completely different to the report done by the NHS slt and both reports where written within a month of each other. For me this shows that there is something going on while at dc’s dads.. I’m not saying abuse but giving they’re anxious in all other settings it is likely happening there too. Also doesn’t help that ex refuses to accept the ASD diagnosis as he believes I’ve misled professionals

Isn’t it just easier for everyone for his weeks to be consecutive?

The problem is that "settled" doesn't have a specific definition. I guess to look at it from your ex's perspective, his concern is that you could say "oh DC still isn't properly settled at school yet" for years to come?

I think if it meant after they have completed their first year at school it just just state that. Settled in suggests some time during their first year. If it's pertaining to summer holidays then they would have completed their first year of school anyway.

Is you ex really arguing against having his child for 2 consecutive weeks? Why would he not want that?

So the court order is referring to ex having 3 non consecutive weeks during the summer and 3 consecutive weeks upon DC being settled in school. For reasons relating to DCs ASD and high levels of anxiety I do not think 3 consecutive weeks would be suitable for DC who gets anxious about if they won’t get to go home while at school.. there are other issues too.

@Toblerbone I have allowed ex to mess about and bend the order to suit himself for 2yrs now, I have done this to avoid arguments and stress and also as they really didn’t affect DC. The fact is my ex doesn’t engage with any professionals when it comes to DC and their struggles and has refused mediation on this, he isn’t even willing to have a conversation.

@Illpickthatup this was exactly my point to ex, it’s a given that dc would have completed a year at school by summer so I would have expected the order to say ‘upon completion of Child’s first year in school father can have child for x number of weeks’

Think I’m being to focused on what the order says when in reality regardless of if it is completing or settled I believe the order needs to be changed to meet DCs needs