Contact with children on separation or divorce

I am called upon from time to time to give advice on parenting plans and court orders relating to contact periods with children of divorced or separated parents.

What disturbs me is that these are usually drawn up by so-called experts who have the child's interests at heart.

Firstly it's important to note that most modern research is fully in favour of the child having regular and sufficient contact, if not equally shared, with both parents.

In the eyes of psychologists the idea of a parent seeing his or her child only on alternate weekends has fallen away in favour of shared parenting where the child has access to and contact with both parents equally.

It's important for the child's emotional and mental development to have a strong bond with both parents, and also to grow in an environment where both parents work to encourage and preserve the bond that the child has with the other parent, as well as the extended families.

Court orders should reflect and embody this objective.

Shortcomings in court orders I have seen include:

1. The order should make contact periods flexible ie create a set time and date, but allow the parties to vary them by consent with the other parent. It's no good having a contact period on a Wednesday at 5pm, if there is no allowance to change that in the case of a problem arising - presumably expecting the parent to abandon that contact period if it can't be met for any reason. An alternative should be allowable and a mechanism provided in the parenting plan or court order to change a date or time.
2. Often a parent, usually the custodian parent, will throw in an obstacle like requiring the other parent to be 'supervised' during contact periods and the court will often merely rubber-stamp that request without going into the circumstances and need for 'supervision' as well as the implications of such an order.

• Internationally, the courts have laid down guidelines for this and an excellent article by a family lawyer featured at the link set out below, says the following:

"When looking at whether contact should be supervised, the court will have to be satisfied that there is a risk to the child if contact is not supervised. This means a real risk of harm, such as physical abuse, neglect or being exposed to drug/alcohol issues. The court will not agree to supervised contact unless there is a good reason; that reason is not because your ex doesn’t like you and wants to cause you a problem. It is all about what is best for your child and it is not usually best for their wellbeing and depth of relationship if that can only be supervised contact with you."

• I have also seen 'supervision' specified at the house of the other parent or at a social worker's decided venue. This is totally inappropriate and does not allow the other parent to introduce the child to their own home and play with things or even enjoy an own room or nursery set up for this, or to take the child on enjoyable outings such as to the animal farm or aquarium. I've seen a parent sitting at a coffee shop table trying to amuse his child for 2 hours. This is boring, unproductive and at worst makes for an experience no child would want to have again with a parent.

3. Any limitation imposed in a court order should have an automatic review date, and not require a parent to make a new application to court to vary the existing court order.

4. The costs and payment of costs should be considered. For instance it can cost up to R2000 for 2 hours for a social worker to 'supervise' without any criterion for the supervision being laid down and often the parent who is subject to 'supervision' must also pay all costs such as transport associated with this. I've seen a social worker report saying, after 30 hours of supervision, that they haven't had 'enough time' to make an assessment.

It's time to take the Children's Act seriously and apply our minds to what is practical and would work to the best interests of the child.