Collaborative Parenting – Easy ways to avoid the conflict

When two people separate there has most likely been a degree of conflict, and difficulty communicating. When there are children involved, it is important that both parents have an awareness that the conflict between the two of them is unlikely to have positive consequences for the children. The following suggestions may assist in prioritising your child or children during difficult periods.

Compromise – the old “give and take” principle

It is the old adage of “a bit of give leads to a bit of take” but parents should be aware that making the other parent’s life difficult with respect to children’s arrangements is unlikely to impact positively on the children. Let’s not beat around the bush, and contemplate that facilitating parenting arrangements is easy. It is not. Often parenting Orders are laced with complex paragraphs with respect to time spent between each parent and often, without some level of give and take, any parenting arrangement in place will not operate smoothly. Parents need to have awareness that whilst parenting arrangements may be inconvenient for them, it is most likely the children who are truly inconvenienced by any situation where the there is no “give” and both parents are “taking”.

Make arrangements and note them on the calendar!

Arrangements for the care of children and the time the children would spend with each parent (whether informal or formal) should be made with a view that each party will do all they can to abide by such arrangements. To assist in this regard a good method is to mark specific details of the arrangements for the children in advance on a calendar and then seek comment or agreement from the other parent and by exchanging a copy of the calendar with that parent when such agreement is reached. Such a calendar ensures that each parent is on the “same page” when it comes to when the changeover of the children will occur and where it will occur. The calendar further gives parties the ability to sort out any misinterpretations, misunderstandings or inconsistent inferences between the parents with respect to the parenting arrangements, before a situation arises where both parents think they are abiding by the arrangements only to find out that they are abiding by different arrangements.

Make use of the Toowoomba Children’s Contact Centre

If there is a possibility of conflict occurring between the parents at a changeover then Best Wilson Buckley Family Law would recommend that parents make use of the Toowoomba Children’s Contact Centre.

The Centre is a safe environment for parents to effect changeover of the children without necessarily having to come into contact with each other. The experienced staff at the contact centre will do all things in their power to ensure that changeover of the children is effected in a proper manner and it gives each parent and the child peace of mind that changeover will be facilitated without the added stress that potential conflict brings with it.

Conclusion

There is no consensus on the best way to make parenting arrangements run smoothly. What there is for the most part though is consensus that conflict between parents is unlikely to have positive consequences for the children. Approaching such matters with a mindset of compromise and acceptance rather than the “my way or the highway” approach and implementing arrangements which will lead to the lowest chance of conflict occurring between the parents is essential.

The completely independent Doyle’s Review of Australian Lawyers 2012, following their extensive research, considers Best Wilson Buckley’s Reagan Wilson as one of the state’s best family lawyers.

Doyle’s Review of the best firms and lawyers is compiled on the back of extensive telephone and face to face interviews with clients, peers and relevant industry bodies. All research is compiled on an independent basis.

In addition to the individual award for best family lawyer, Best Wilson Buckley Family Law was ranked as one of Queensland’s top family law firms.

“It’s a great honour to be acknowledged by both our clients and peers in this manner,” said Best Wilson Buckley Family Law Director, Kara Best.

“We are deeply committed to providing excellent client service.”

Family law has the capacity to inflame emotions in a way that very few other issues can. Most will have a story of a friend, acquaintance or family member that has been let down by the system and unfairly derived of time with their children or their material wealth post separation. It is difficult to countenance criticisms of the system that are more general in nature. The law is highly discretionary in that what is in the best interests of a child will depend upon that unique child and his or her situation. Similarly, what is just and equitable when it comes to the division of property will depend upon a myriad of variables, and some might argue rightfully so. One rule for all has potential to generate enormous injustice.

Whilst your lawyer should be in a position to provide you with specialist advice about what will happen in the event that a matter progresses to Court, ultimately you’re unlikely to be amongst the limited number that ultimately reach the doors of the Court and a more pragmatic approach is required in order to get matters resolved quickly and on the best terms for preserving your post-separation parenting relationship.

Negotiating a path following separation is a difficult thing, and often there is little guidance as to how to move forward in a positive way. The desire to protect a child from the repercussions of separation is often the highest priority for separating parents. Whilst the law has the same agenda, it rarely offers practical guidance in relation to protecting children from emotional harm in the context of separation. Lynne Clark and Cheryl Smith are both social workers, with extensive experience in the dynamics of separation and the effect of relationship breakdown on children. In their book Separating Respectfully they have endeavoured to identify twelve `rules’ to protect your children from emotional harm. They include:

Parents must make the decisions around how each child will spend their time
Adhere to any parenting agreement reached
Be on time
Use flexibility wisely (consistency is important)
Negotiate with the other parent before you tell your children of any proposed changes
Never communicate your arrangements through your children
Do not question your children in detail
Do not believe all your children tell you
Respect the role of the other parent, even if you no longer respect the person
Behave respectfully
Prioritise your child’s experiences (in other words maximise the opportunity for your child’s positive experiences whilst in your care)
Focus on yourself and what you are doing right rather than on your former partner and what he or she is doing wrong.

Efforts were made by the Howard Government in 2006 to move the Family Law from a more adversarial or Kramer v. Kramer orientation to a more collaborative approach. Long term research has yet to establish how successful these changes have been in altering the experience of children caught up in parental conflict.

More information in relation to the publication Separating Respectfully can be obtained from www.separatingrespectfully.com

More information can be obtained from Best Wilson Buckley Family Law, Family Law Firm in Toowoomba.
The information contained herein is not intended to be a complete statement of the law on any subject and should not be used as a substitute for legal advice in specific fact situations.

There is a growing incidence of the use of `Facebook evidence’ in family law court proceedings. Extracts from Facebook, printed by a `friend’ and provided to the other parent are routinely annexed to affidavit evidence and the Court asked to infer something negative about the publishing parent. It is imperative that parents be conscious of the consequences of placing any negative comments about another parent on an internet site such a Facebook. `Friends’ may no longer be `friends’ in the context of separation and a heated parenting dispute, and comments made in the heat of the moment may ultimately form the basis for a Court’s decision about time that a child is to spend with a parent. This will be particularly damaging evidence in circumstances where a child has access to a parent’s site and the capacity to view derogatory comments.

The attitude of parents to each other is an important consideration under the Family Law Act, as is the capacity of a parent to foster the other parent’s relationship with a child. Status updates like `My ex is a loser’ or `I just smashed her in Court’ are unlikely to encourage a positive parenting relationship. The Court tends to view such comments as a desire to publish to the world at large, rather than something as discrete as an email or a chat over coffee with a friend. Everyone deserves the opportunity to vent, it is simply important to choose the right avenue. There are specific provisions of the Family Law Act that prohibit parties from discussing court proceedings in a public forum and provide serious penalties for any publication.

It is imperative that children are distanced from verbal or written comments of a derogatory nature. There is an abundance of psychological evidence that clearly establishes the damaging effect upon a growing psyche of being exposed to parental conflict.

Posting photographs or location updates on Facebook can also be used as evidence. For example, in one Family Court decision, a parent was ordered to spend time with the child at his home during contact visits however, a photograph later surfaced on Facebook with the Father and the child at the beach. The Court subsequently found that the parent had breached the Order with serious consequences.

Whilst we are all human, best to keep the above in mind when next updating your Facebook status.

The practice of `Collaborative Law’ offers enormous potential for the community, and particularly where family breakdown and the needs of children are involved.

The concept originated in the US in the early 1990s and involves separating couples and their lawyers making a commitment to attempt, in good faith and with a spirit of full disclosure and honesty, to reach a mutually acceptable settlement without going to Court, and by cooperatively working to address everyone’s legal, financial and emotional needs.

If agreement is not reached, and the parties must turn to the Court, then each respective lawyer is obliged to withdraw from any further involvement.
There are significant advantages to the approach:

The process is very interest driven, rather than focussed on tactics and one party `winning’
The focus is on identifying what each party (and their children) require to move forward positively, and reaching agreement about how best to accommodate those needs
The process encourages open, non-confrontational communication in a round table conference format, not angry inflammatory correspondence
It avoids Court, and the significant cost, delay and hostility that often results from going to Court
It avoids handing control over your life and your children to a third party (Judge) whom has no insight into your needs or experience
Children’s needs are given priority
The parties can embrace creative solutions suited to their own family’s needs
Other professionals such as counsellors, accountants and financial advisers who are trained in Collaborative practice routinely engage with the parties and their lawyers to explore solutions

The process is not suited to matters where there are any allegations of risk or violence to a party or the children, where a party is simply wanting revenge against a former partner, or if a party wishes to keep secrets.

Should you be in the midst of separation, I encourage you to seek out a trained local collaborative lawyer and ask them at the outset of your dispute whether your situation would be assisted by adopting the collaborative approach.

To find out more about collaborative law and trained practitioners of this model in the Toowoomba region contact the Queensland Collaborative Law Association

The short answer is yes. Under the provisions of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), a parent, grandparent or any person concerned with the care, welfare or development of a child can make application to the Court.

This effectively allows step-parents, and other significant family members and previous carers to seek the assistance of the Court in restoring their role in the child’s life following separation and conflict.

If you need assistance with this area of law, come and see Best & Wilson Solicitors Toowoomba for more information.

The information contained herein is not intended to be a complete statement of the law on any subject and should not be used as a substitute for legal advice in specific fact situations.

There is a growing incidence of the use of `Facebook evidence’ in family law court proceedings. Extracts from Facebook, printed by a `friend’ and provided to the other parent are routinely annexed to affidavit evidence and the Court asked to infer something negative about the publishing parent. It is imperative that parents be conscious of the consequences of placing any negative comments about another parent on an internet site such a Facebook. `Friends’ may no longer be `friends’ in the context of separation and a heated parenting dispute, and comments made in the heat of the moment may ultimately form the basis for a Court’s decision about time that a child is to spend with a parent. This will be particularly damaging evidence in circumstances where a child has access to a parent’s site and the capacity to view derogatory comments.

The attitude of parents to each other is an important consideration under the Family Law Act, as is the capacity of a parent to foster the other parent’s relationship with a child. Status updates like `My ex is a loser’ or `I just smashed her in Court’ are unlikely to encourage a positive parenting relationship. The Court tends to view such comments as a desire to publish to the world at large, rather than something as discrete as an email or a chat over coffee with a friend. Everyone deserves the opportunity to vent, it is simply important to choose the right avenue. There are specific provisions of the Family Law Act that prohibit parties from discussing court proceedings in a public forum and provide serious penalties for any publication.

It is imperative that children are distanced from verbal or written comments of a derogatory nature. There is an abundance of psychological evidence that clearly establishes the damaging effect upon a growing psyche of being exposed to parental conflict.

Posting photographs or location updates on Facebook can also be used as evidence. For example, in one Family Court decision, a parent was ordered to spend time with the child at his home during contact visits however, a photograph later surfaced on Facebook with the Father and the child at the beach. The Court subsequently found that the parent had breached the Order with serious consequences.

Whilst we are all human, best to keep the above in mind when next updating your Facebook status.

I often hear horror stories about how much money has been spent in legal fees associated with a matrimonial or de facto property settlement dispute. Often lawyers are cast in a negative light in this regard. Whilst some blame can, from time to time, be appropriate, it’s imperative that those in dispute with their former partner give serious thought to taking control of their own legal fees and the direction of the dispute.

I recommend that you keep the following in mind:

1. Always keep in mind the bottom line. It makes no sense to expend $30,000 in legal fee if you stand to receive a settlement of only slightly more than that;
2. Give some thought to the “go away” factor, how much are you prepared to sacrifice in the context of negotiations in order to move forward positively and without the dispute hanging around your neck;
3. Seek experience and specialisation from your legal adviser (one doesn’t seek out a neurologist to discuss a broken foot);
4. Take time to consider the advice provided, and think seriously before disregarding that advice if you intend to do so;
5. Where possible exhaust the prospect of agreement via mediation or family dispute resolution before contemplating an Application to the Court;
6. Refrain from repeating discussions with your legal adviser about the same issues;
7. Utilise experienced and responsible administrative staff to answer any queries within their capacity and realm of expertise;
8. Where possible seek to prepare written instructions in relation to the history of a particular dispute;
9. When asked to collate documents, take some time to do so in an ordered and easy to follow manner;
10. Utilise email if this form of communication is embraced by your solicitor;
11. Communicate clearly to your lawyer what you need from them, consider putting together a series of questions in the week leading up to your appointment in order to ensure that you address everything on your mind;
12. Ensure that there is an open and honest dialogue with your solicitor in relation to your legal fees; and
13. Seek clarification as to how you will be charged before asking your solicitor to start work.

Professional service is all about reputation and client satisfaction. Be conscious that the great majority of solicitors want only to put you in a better position as a consequence of their involvement.

It is somewhat obvious to acknowledge that Christmas is sometimes a difficult period for separated families. The law recognises that it’s important for children to have some consistency about celebrations of important events like Christmas and Birthdays, and to enjoy time with as many family members as possible.

Ultimately, it is a matter for each family as to how to embrace a peaceful and happy Christmas Day following separation. Some families are in a position to enjoy special days together, with parents putting aside differences to ensure that they are both available to their celebrating child at the same time. This isn’t the most practical option where there is any risk of open conflict, or new partners and children are involved. Some embrace the prospect of a shared day, so one parent enjoys celebrations with the child on the eve of the special day and morning, and either prior to or following lunch the child moves to the other parent to enjoy the afternoon and evening. This works effectively when the distance between households is limited. Based on the routine of extended family celebrations, it might work for this to remain consistent from year to year, or alternatively it could be swapped each year.

Where distance is problematic, many parents agree to the prospect of a child spending the entire Christmas period (or birthday) in alternate years with each parent. For some this is a painful alternative, and whilst telephone and SKYPE time can be enjoyed, often children will be somewhat despondent about the prospect of missing out entirely on spending time with a parent on a special day like Christmas or birthday.

Ultimately, the Court does seek that parents be guided by their children’s needs. Many older children will comfortably embrace the prospect of spending alternate Christmas or birthdays with a parent (and particularly if presents are still exchanged in a ceremonious way on a separate occasion). Younger children may need parents to put aside their personal desires in order to have a more joint day. It is most important to ensure that there is no potential for conflict in the presence of the children. Best wishes for safe and happy Christmas period.

Kara Best
Director

Legislation has now been passed to validate orders made by the Family Law Courts in matters between de facto couples that resulted from an “administrative error” made by the Federal Government.

The Family Law Amendment (Validation of Certain Orders and Other Measures) Bill 2012 passed through the Senate on 22 March 2012. The legislation was introduced into the House of Representatives on 14 March 2012 to enable orders that were made prior to 11 February 2012 to be validated.

On 1 March 2009, changes to the Family Law Act 1975 came into effect to enable the Family Law Courts to have jurisdiction over de facto financial matters that had previously be the subject of state or territory legislation. However, important proclamations under the Family Law Act giving the Courts jurisdiction to made orders and declarations were overlooked by the Federal Government and not made. As a consequence, such orders and declarations may not have been valid and could have resulted in uncertainty about the arrangements for property settlement matters agreed to by parties or ordered by the Courts.

The purpose of the Bill was to ensure orders that had been made prior to 11 February 2012 were validated without parties having to go to any further expense or bring further proceedings in the Courts. The effect of the legislation is to “put persons in the same position as they would have been in” if the proclamations had been made in March 2009. The Bill also makes amendment to the Family Law Act to remove the necessity for proclamations to be made to bring into effect changes any future changes to the Family Law Act to prevent a similar situation from occurring again in the future.

The changes to the legislation are likely to come into effect by the end of March.


On occasion there may be some doubts held in relation to the paternity of a child. From the outset it is imperative to acknowledge that any confusion in relation to paternity should not be shared with a child without the guidance of a counsellor or psychologist, and not until there is some definitive understanding of the result of testing. It goes without saying that much damage can be done by unnecessarily disrupting a child’s understanding of their world.

Whilst informal testing can be undertaken using the services of many commercial providers, ultimately if you are seeking to rely upon a paternity result in seeking to set aside a child support obligation, then it is necessary to obtain a formal Order of the Court authorising that testing. The Court may or may not determine to allow that testing, as they ask the question of whether that testing (and the consequences of any result) would be in the best interests of a child.

If you require assistance with this issue, help is available from Toowoomba solicitors, Best Wilson Buckley Family Law.

The information contained herein is not intended to be a complete statement of the law on any subject and should not be used as a substitute for legal advice in specific fact situations.

The completely independent Doyle’s Review of Australian Lawyers 2012, following their extensive research, considers Best Wilson Buckley’s Reagan Wilson as one of the state’s best family lawyers.

Doyle’s Review of the best firms and lawyers is compiled on the back of extensive telephone and face to face interviews with clients, peers and relevant industry bodies. All research is compiled on an independent basis.

In addition to the individual award for best family lawyer, Best Wilson Buckley Family Law was ranked as one of Queensland’s top family law firms.

“It’s a great honour to be acknowledged by both our clients and peers in this manner,” said Best Wilson Buckley Family Law Director, Kara Best.

“We are deeply committed to providing excellent client service.”

Family law has the capacity to inflame emotions in a way that very few other issues can.  Most will have a story of a friend, acquaintance or family member that has been let down by the system and unfairly derived of time with their children or their material wealth post separation.  It is difficult to countenance criticisms of the system that are more general in nature.  The law is highly discretionary in that what is in the best interests of a child will depend upon that unique child and his or her situation.  Similarly, what is just and equitable when it comes to the division of property will depend upon a myriad of variables, and some might argue rightfully so.   One rule for all has potential to generate enormous injustice.

Whilst your lawyer should be in a position to provide you with specialist advice about what will happen in the event that a matter progresses to Court, ultimately you’re unlikely to be amongst the limited number that ultimately reach the doors of the Court and a more pragmatic approach is required in order to get matters resolved quickly and on the best terms for preserving your post-separation parenting relationship.

Negotiating a path following separation is a difficult thing, and often there is little guidance as to how to move forward in a positive way.  The desire to protect a child from the repercussions of separation is often the highest priority for separating parents.   Whilst the law has the same agenda, it rarely offers practical guidance in relation to protecting children from emotional harm in the context of separation.   Lynne Clark and Cheryl Smith are both social workers, with extensive experience in the dynamics of separation and the effect of relationship breakdown on children.  In their book Separating Respectfully they have endeavoured to identify twelve `rules’ to protect your children from emotional harm.  They include:

1.     Parents must make the decisions around how each child will spend their time

2.     Adhere to any parenting agreement reached

3.     Be on time

4.     Use flexibility wisely (consistency is important)

5.     Negotiate with the other parent before you tell your children of any proposed changes

6.     Never communicate your arrangements through your children

7.     Do not question your children in detail

8.     Do not believe all your children tell you

9.     Respect the role of the other parent, even if you no longer respect the person

10.  Behave respectfully

11.  Prioritise your child’s experiences (in other words maximise the opportunity for your child’s positive experiences whilst in your care)

12.  Focus on yourself and what you are doing right rather than on your former partner and what he or she is doing wrong.

Efforts were made by the Howard Government in 2006 to move the Family Law from a more adversarial or Kramer v. Kramer orientation to a more collaborative approach.  Long term research has yet to establish how successful these changes have been in altering the experience of children caught up in parental conflict.

More information in relation to the publication Separating Respectfully can be obtained from www.separatingrespectfully.com

More information can be obtained from Best Wilson Buckley Solicitors in Toowoomba.
The information contained herein is not intended to be a complete statement of the law on any subject and should not be used as a substitute for legal advice in specific fact situations.

More recent publicity surrounding a number of celebrity surrogacy arrangements has highlighted the role of Surrogacy in allowing infertile couples the opportunity to share in the joys of parenting.

Surrogacy is effectively the act of a woman carrying a child to term with a view to surrendering care of that child to another party following his or her birth.  A child born of surrogacy may be biologically the child of his or her intended parents, the child only of the intended father, or not biologically related to either intended parent.

Prior to 1 June 2010, surrogacy was illegal in any form in Queensland, this included both commercial surrogacy (which involves payment) and altruistic (or non-commercial) surrogacy.

Following the introduction of the Surrogacy Act 2010 (Qld), from 1 June 2010 Queenslanders are now at liberty to enter into altruistic surrogacy agreements where certain very specific conditions are met.

Whilst specific and detailed legal advice is required before you contemplate such an agreement or conception.
Some important aspects of the new law include:
–       Intended parents can be married, in a de facto relationship (including same sex relationship), or even a single person;

–       There must be evidence of medical or social need for the surrogacy;

–       The Agreement must be made before the child is conceived;

–       Independent legal advice and appropriate counselling prior to conception for all parties is also a must;

–       The Agreement must be in writing;

–       The intended parents must be residents of Queensland;

–       All parties must be at least 25 years of age when the Agreement was made; and

–       The reimbursement of a birth mother’s reasonable expenses associated with the surrogacy is permitted under an Altruistic Surrogacy Agreement.

The Act allows the parties to the Agreement to make an application to the Court following the birth of the child in order to seek the transfer of parentage from the birth parents to the intended parents.

The most important thing to keep in mind is that a Surrogacy Agreement is not enforceable.  For this reason, it does pose a considerable risk to both birth parents and intended parents, and should be the subject of careful consideration.

More information can be obtained from the Queensland Department of Justice or a Family Law Specialist.
The information contained herein is not intended to be a complete statement of the law on any subject and should not be used as a substitute for legal advice in specific fact situations.

All too often men and women who have played a significant role in the lives of children allow themselves to be distanced from an ongoing role in that child’s life following separation from the child’s parent, on the basis that they are not biologically related to the child.

The Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) imposes no requirement of biology upon a person wanting to play an ongoing role in a child’s life where there is an established history of meaningful involvement with that child. Quite the contrary, the Court’s motivation in most cases, is to maintain the child’s stability and emotional supports following separation.

There is a significant quantity of case law reflecting the Court’s acknowledgment of the importance of step-parents spending time with children, including non-biological lesbian and gay parents who have either been involved in the conception of a child, or acted as a step-parent during their childhood.

Similarly, grandparents fall cleanly within the definition of someone whom has a right to seek a Parenting Order. Unfortunately, sometimes relationships break down between the generations, and there is no requirement that the child’s parents have separated for a grandparent to seek specific scheduled time with a child.

Any issue of the time that a step-parent or grandparent will spend with a child will be resolved by reference to the question of what will be in the child’s best interests having regard to their unique sensitivities and personality. Obviously, it’s imperative that a child is not destabilised by being shuttled between multiple residences, but in the case of a child whom has never known any other parents, the Court will routinely direct a more shared care arrangement irrespective of one parent not being biologically related to the child. For the parent who does have a biological relationship with the child, it is important that he or she be conscious that they may ultimately be judged adversely if they have taken steps to discourage the child’s relationship with their former partner, or unreasonably limit the time they can spend together.

The Court will routinely emphasise the need for parents to move forward in a positive way, and with one eye on the benefit to their children of spending time with those adults and other children who have played an important role in their lives previously.

More information can be obtained from Best Wilson Buckley Family Law, Toowoomba Lawyer.
The information contained herein is not intended to be a complete statement of the law on any subject and should not be used as a substitute for legal advice in specific fact situations.

At Best Wilson Buckley Family Law we are often asked about the value of `Pre Nuptial Agreements’, known in Australia as Binding Financial Agreements. These are documents which set out, in a prescribed way, what will occur in the unlikely event of separation. The agreement is signed by both parties after obtaining legal advice and will generally set out: –

– The assets and liabilities held by each party at the date of the Agreement (your separate  property’);

– Your shared intentions in relation to who is to retain your `separate property’ in the event of separation;

– How property acquired jointly during the relationship is to be dealt with if separation occurs; and

– How inheritances, gifts and windfalls are to be treated and divided if it becomes necessary to do so.

Agreements can be drafted in anticipation of marriage or simply cohabitation, or after both have occurred if a couple simply desire some clarity around where they both stand.

Importantly, the Agreement has the effect of `ousting’ the jurisdiction of the Court. In other words, if an Agreement is binding upon a couple who have separated, the Court is obliged to honour the terms of the Agreement unless the Agreement is set aside. This avoids costly negotiation and litigation.

Naturally, raising the prospect of such an agreement can cast a shadow on what is an exciting and optimistic time. It needn’t do so. It is best to raise the prospect of the Agreement early, and by emphasising the benefit to both of you of having some clarity around arrangements. Ironically, confusion about intentions and a lack of clarity around these issues can often lead to relationship conflict and the breakdown of a relationship.

Where one has already endured the emotional and financial cost of prolonged negotiations or litigation following a previous separation, often a great deal of comfort is drawn from knowing that if there is a next time (in terms of separation) there will be no question as to what is to occur. Similarly, an Agreement has the potential to improve relationships between new spouses and adult children. If adult children are assured as to the intentions of a new spouse, often they will be more willing to embrace the new relationship. Also, if a spouse is deeply entrenched in family business or farming enterprises, there is really an obligation to protect other family members or business partners from the prospect of expensive litigation over the value of business/farming interests or worse still, the prospect of the sale of the family farm or business to pay out a departing spouse.

Be cautious of the allure of a `budget’ agreement or pro forma Agreement. If the Agreement is not prepared properly and specifically for your personal circumstances, it is more likely to be set aside and afford you no protection at all.  The value of an Agreement to your unique situation is something that should be discussed on a confidential basis with your family law specialist.

More information can be obtained from our Toowoomba Family Law Lawyers.
The information contained herein is not intended to be a complete statement of the law on any subject and should not be used as a substitute for legal advice in specific fact situations.

In recent weeks, the Australian Institute of Family Studies has published a number of significant research findings related to the effectiveness of the 2006 ‘shared parenting’ reforms. Shared parenting is defined as where a child spends five or more nights each fortnight with each parent following separation.

Arguably as a result of the reforms, the issue of `equal time’ or the `number of nights’ enjoyed by each parent with a child has become central to the assessment of the “quality” of a parent’s relationship with a child following separation. One particular study was focused upon the issue of equal time in the context of two particularly vulnerable groups, school age children in high conflict separations and infants/preschoolers.

Put simply, the findings of the research include:

– That parents who had beneficial shared care arrangements in place lived near each other, tried to respect the competence of the other parent, and were flexible and accommodating rather than rigid in their approach
– For school age children, nurturing relationships with each parent and supportive relationships between parents had greater bearing on many outcomes than the actual time spent with each parent (in other words, acrimony and conflict are really dangerous to a child’s development)
– Rigid arrangements, often fuelled by acrimony and poor cooperation between parents, was associated with higher depressive and anxiety symptoms for school age children
– Regardless of parental cooperation and acrimony, shared overnight care of children less than four (4) years of age had an independent and significantly damaging impact on several emotional and behavioural outcomes for little people
– As children grow older, and particularly once they have developed the capacity to self-soothe and anticipate what each day will bring (generally around the age of 4 to 5), they are better able to straddle households in a shared overnight arrangement
– The research does not support using `shared care’ as the starting point for infants and children under four years
– Shared care will be a viable option for older children where parents can work together, are attuned to their children and prepared to be flexible
– Arrangements may need to change over time in order to be responsive to the changing needs of each child.

While it is anticipated that the above research will heavily influence the outcome of family law disputes concerning parenting arrangements for children, every situation is unique, and requires specialist legal and psychological advice.

The information contained herein is not intended to be a complete statement of the law on any subject and should not be used as a substitute for legal advice in specific fact situations.

More information can be obtained from Best Wilson Buckley Family Law, Solicitors Toowoomba.
The information contained herein is not intended to be a complete statement of the law on any subject and should not be used as a substitute for legal advice in specific fact situations.

A family law property settlement generally happens in three distinct steps. The first of which is valuing your property.

In other words, determining the net value of all property. This is irrespective of whether property is held legally by yourself, by your former partner or by both of you jointly. Property includes real estate, cash, investments, furniture, motor vehicles, interests in a company, trust or partnership and superannuation.

A value must be determined for each item of property and initially we encourage our clients to seek their former partner’s agreement to a value. In the event there is no agreement, both of you can agree to the appointment of a joint expert to value the relevant item of property. At the conclusion of this step, you will be in a position to identify all property and the net value of your property pool.

Often the smaller items of property like the furniture and household goods held by each of you that can cause problems with agreeing a valuation. Sometimes people will claim that the furniture in the other party’s hands is worth tens of thousands of dollars. This may be because they have valued the property at a “replacement” or insured value as opposed to a second hand value. For the purposes of negotiations it is important that all furniture and chattels be taken at their current sale value or second hand value. This is often much lower than the replacement value.

In order to value a superannuation interest there is a process to be adopted under the relevant regulations. We are able to assist you in this regard.
Watch this video next

More information can be obtained from Best Wilson Buckley Family Law, Toowoomba Lawyers.
The information contained herein is not intended to be a complete statement of the law on any subject and should not be used as a substitute for legal advice in specific fact situations.

Following separation, there are a number of important things you must attend to. It is necessary for both of you to make some immediate decisions in relation to more practical matters impacting upon your children and joint assets. These include answering questions such as:

How will we explain our decision to separate to the children?
How do we best allow the children to maintain the same level of time and contact with each of us immediately following our separation?
How do we minimise disruption to the children?
What arrangements can be made for our living and financial arrangements immediately following our separation?
In what way will we continue to meet our obligations to joint liabilities pending an agreement about the division of our property?
What will happen to any joint bank, building society or credit union accounts in the short term?
Can we agree as to how to divide our household effects, furniture and motor vehicles?

From my experience, these conversations are usually very difficult given the heightened emotions. That said, they are fundamentally important questions that if you and your former partner can agree to answer, then the process going forward will be significantly easier.

If you are struggling to reach agreement on these preliminary issues, there is assistance available from Toowoomba Lawyers, Best Wilson Buckley Family Law.

Quite often separated couples are assisted by a counselor or psychologist to help facilitate their discussion around these issues. Often a local professional is available on a more urgent basis to assist in this regard.
The information contained herein is not intended to be a complete statement of the law on any subject and should not be used as a substitute for legal advice in specific fact situations.
 

Separation can be an incredibly difficult time for everyone concerned, particularly children. Not only do you need to ensure that you’re managing your own emotional wellbeing, often your experience is complicated by the need to respond appropriately to the grief and adjustment difficulties experienced by your child or children. Often, significant and meaningful assistance can be provided by interacting with a psychologist or counselor who is experienced in assisting both adults and children to adjust to life following separation.

Alternatively, Family Dispute Resolution (“FDR”)is a formal mediation process offered by a number of community providers. There is sometimes a waiting time attaching to these services which sometimes precludes their use around the time of separation when time is of the essence. Your closest Family Dispute Resolution provider can be located by telephoning 1800 050 321 or visiting Family Relationships Online.

More information can be obtained from Best Wilson Buckley Family Law, Toowoomba Solicitor.
The information contained herein is not intended to be a complete statement of the law on any subject and should not be used as a substitute for legal advice in specific fact situations.