April 2014 Changes in Family Law re: Residency (Custody)

[FullySwindonian]

Everything's changing with regards to your rights as a lone parent over contact/access and Residency Orders (custody), now to be called 'Child Arrangement'.

A couple of links below summarise.

Changes in Family Law

"Everything"?

Hardly anything except the name really.

Good! It all sounds great.

Sounds good on paper but realisticly i doubt it will change much. But I'm a sinical cow anyway lol

Shame they can't actually force absent fathers to have at least some form of contact though. So no I don't think its anything amazing.

"Shame they can't actually force absent fathers to have at least some form of contact though."

Absent parents, not absent fathers.

What would be the point in forcing contact ? No benefit to the child for sure. To have to be around an adult who do not want to be there... Raises all kinds f issues

Yes, ridiculous, who would leave their kid with someone who was being forced?

But the start point that both parents play an important role is good. It won't change much to start with but it's an important change that hopefully overtime may become a view more widely accepted

The actual wording of the law is that both parents have some involvement. That can be indirect contact 1-2 times a year. I don't see how that's good news at all.

Your rights?

Swindon, how are your rights changing?

"The actual wording of the law is that both parents have some involvement. That can be indirect contact 1-2 times a year. I don't see how that's good news at all."

The particular clause related to involvement hasn't been implemented and there is no sign yet of any commencement order implementing it in the future. In any case it doesn't change anything as there is already case law that developing and maintaining relationships with both parents is usually in the best interests of children.

However it's difficult to see how a child would benefit from forcing a parent to look after them against the wishes of the parent. If neither parent wants to care for a child or is unable to care for them the children go into care.

PS It's Parental Responsibility that gives parents the responsibility and rights to carry out those responsibilities and PR isn't changing.

I agree, I don't think it will change much in practice.

I'm not keen on the enforced mediation. In principle, it is not required where there has been DV, but a lot of people won't be able to demonstrate that they were emotionally abused by their ex. I was required to do mediation, but it was four years after splitting up, and I felt strong enough not to give in to everything ex asked for. If it had taken place soon after the split, I would have rolled over and agreed to everything. It would have been a "success" - a case that didn't go to court - but it wouldn't have been best for dd.

I'm interested to to see how the time-limits will be approached. My ex launched his case in Sept 2012, and the final hearing is due next month - 21 months. It's been a huge waste of time and money.

I was under the impression that the time limits were for public law cases, rather than private law?

I agree there's no point forcing an absent parent to have contact. It would be better to focus on correcting the flaws in the system that leave parents desperate to see their children and play a significant role in their lives but are held back by delays/"smokescreen allegations".

You might be right about the time limits.