I’m especially interested in what actually worked in real life. For example:
I’m trying to protect both myself and my son from situations where instability or retaliation can suddenly override the normal parenting structure. I still want joint parenting in principle, but I’m realizing that “joint” only works if there is a practical mechanism for what happens when one parent refuses to cooperate.
- tie-breaking authority after written notice and a response window
- parenting coordinator involvement
- specific decision categories assigned to each parent
- requirements that schedule changes be mutually agreed in writing
- limits on unilateral changes unless there is a true emergency
- consequences or remedies when one parent ignores the order
I’m trying to protect both myself and my son from situations where instability or retaliation can suddenly override the normal parenting structure. I still want joint parenting in principle, but I’m realizing that “joint” only works if there is a practical mechanism for what happens when one parent refuses to cooperate.
I've often commented that I like the concept of Decision Making or Tie Breaker status but occasionally I've had responses that those terms weren't possible in their states. For example, I've heard that Florida doesn't have separate categories for custody and parenting. So interviewing some of your more experienced local family law attorneys (lawyers or solicitors) may inform you of approaches they've tried. You don't have to pay a retainer or hire every lawyer you consult or interview.
When seeking Tie Breaker status, you can explain to the court that sometimes a prompt resolution to a timely issue is necessary but that the other parent would still have the option (and expense) to seek appointed professionals' decision later. Those professionals may be mediators, parenting coordinators or even the court itself.
For example, there may be school or medical decisions that can't be put off for months and months until court gets around to a series of hearings.
Some looked at the interests of the other parent. Perhaps the custody could be split into various groups. You ex might feel that is a "win" if one gets religious or dental authority while the other gets medical or school authority... sort of a mix and match.
Most courts are reluctant to modify orders. Part of this may be that they really want the parents to "work it out". That's how a petition or motion in court can take several hearings before finally the court is forced to issue a decision. (And judges don't like to make decisions since they can be appealed and there is risk of a reversal.) So often they'll try to make as small a change as possible. The lesson I (belatedly) walked away with: Get as good and futureproof of a court order from the very start.
I recall when I was at the too-brief initial temp order hearing and my lawyer whispered to me, "Shh... we'll fix it later." Yeah, like two years later? Lesson learned. Boilerplate temp orders may be somewhat temporary in most court cases but our sort of cases take much, much longer to get resolved.



