header-logo header-logo

Shared parenting

22 February 2012 / Hle Blog
Issue: 7502 / Categories: Blogs
printer mail-detail

HLE blogger Guy Skelton examines the lessons from Australia on shared parenting after divorce

The recent government response to the Family Justice Review has at its centre an entitlement to a legally binding presumption of shared parenting. Legislation in favour of shared parenting would represent the greatest change to the Children Act since its creation in 1989. Arguably, the proposal represents a levelling of the playing field, addressing a perceived imbalance in the treatment of parents post-separation. However, to some it is a legislative minefield detracting from the primary consideration—the child.

Prior to the government’s response, David Norgrove, author of the independent Family Justice Review, stressed that the current law should not be changed, citing the difficulties encountered under Australia’s shared parenting laws. Despite the recommendation of the independent review, the government believes that legislative change offers the best protection for families in England and Wales.

But which elements of the Act would the government seek to amend? Many organisations, including single parents’ charity Gingerbread, share Norgrove’s concerns—that the government must learn from the fallout of the Australian amendments and not legislate in haste.

Under Australia’s Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Act 2006, the court begins with the principle of equal division of custody. The presumption may be rebutted “by evidence that satisfies the court that it would not be in the best interests of the child for the child’s parents to have equal shared parental responsibility for the child” (s 61D(4)). The second key feature of the amendments was the explicit statement that shared parental responsibility creates obligations to share decision-making (s 65DAC(3))…”

To continue reading go to: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk

 

Issue: 7502 / Categories: Blogs
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
Is a suspect’s state of mind a ‘fact’ capable of triggering adverse inferences? Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Smith of Corker Binning examines how R v Leslie reshapes the debate
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
back-to-top-scroll