An imaginary world

[daddaddad]

I’ve been thinking and I have a hypothetical for your consideration…It may be impossible to complete but there may be some interesting views.

Here goes - “In an effort to provide early intervention and to take pressure of the Family Law Court, the Federal Government decided that they are going to legislate in order to make basic mandatory conditions that apply to every child over 12 months of age in Australia, in the event that their parents separate.”

You have never been a parent, never met you ex (or current) partner and therefore have no personal experiences in this matter. You are responsible for writing the draft of these conditions – What would they be?

Don’t think it through too deeply, imagine that it is an ideal world and there is a way that these conditions can be implemented.

I’ll kick it off with a suggestion;

- Grandparents will be granted at least one afternoon of access to the child per month.

[rosebaby]

Hmmm. I know this isn't really the point, but no law works like this. That's why they have judges and juries, to figure out intricacies and take individual circumstances into consideration. What if they had a rule that had to be implemented like the one you suggested, and the grandparents were homocidal paedophiles??

BUT, let's say that every couple who splits are wonderful parents, and their extended families are the warm, cuddly grandparents usually found on advertisements for Werther's Originals.

I would say...actually, I can't think of anything! Kids should spend equal time with both parents? I don't believe that's fair to the kids. Kids should be able to see grandparents? Sure, but you took that idea. Kids should be able to spend reasonable and workable time with both parents? Obviously. Wait, I know! "Both parents must demonstrate that they will continue to provide equal amounts of discipline and spoiling/treating." ie: one parent doesn't get locked into being the boring one who makes the kids do homework/eat vegetables/clean room etc, while the other one is always way-hey, Disneyland and chocolate milkshakes.

[OneBabyBoy]

If I had never had children daddaddad I'm not sure that my views would be very different to now. My parents had a very bitter divorce so I already knew quite alot about family law.
I maybe would have said that the person proven to be most responsible (which is not always the mother) should have the majority of the custody with the other parent having every 2nd weekend, half the school holidays and every second easter/christmas periods. Pretty standard really.
If anything like that does ever happen I very much hope it isn't written by childless people. I would hope that they would ask both sides for their input.

[Chanelc]

[quote=daddaddad;1213948] “In an effort to provide early intervention and to take pressure of the Family Law Court, the Federal Government decided that they are going to legislate in order to make basic mandatory conditions that apply to every child over 12 months of age in Australia, in the event that their parents separate.”

A child needs security and stability - the main care provider (mum or dad) determines the access granted to the dad and grandparents. In dispute a child counselor determines what is best for a child.

The focus should be the child not the parents, grand parents or the law and the main child provider should know the child best...

In the event the main provider is being malicious a cousnelor should decide

[maad]

Chanel,

This would be great if it could work for all in the broader sense. My childrens grandmother loves them and misses them I know but she can't come near me without shouting abuse etc, which is very upsetting for the children only 21mnths old.
If only we could all do as I say not as I do and consider just the childrens best interests and not the what about me mentality.