have received the majority of majority custodial These laws identify only the Mother as the legal
responsibility), it is not factually accurate that the “law” guardian of a child if the parents were not married
is facially biased. In fact, the law goes out of its way to when the child was conceived or born. This natural
be neutral, or impartial on its face. advantage gives the Mother legal control of the child’s
Florida law states: welfare until the biological Father acquires a court
1. “It is the public policy of this state that each minor
order establishing his paternity. So again, when it came
time for the courts to consider the children’s normal
child has frequent and continuing contact with both routines, the Mother had a natural head start. Then
parents after the parents separate or the marriage there are other natural factors like the Mother nursing,
of the parties is dissolved and to encourage parents etc. that played a role in the historical imbalance. As
to share the rights and responsibilities, and joys, of these societal norms have changed, so must the law.
child-rearing. There is no presumption for or against
the father or mother of the child or for or against
any specific time-sharing schedule when creating or
modifying the parenting plan of the child.”
2. “The court shall order that the parental
responsibility for a minor child be shared by both
parents unless the court finds that shared parental
responsibility would be detrimental to the child.”
Fla. Statutes §61.13(c)1,2.
The reality is that Florida is stepping forward with
the changing times, and as you can see, the current
language of our statutes gives at least a hint of equal
rights to time-sharing.
This does not mean that the other misconception that
I often hear is true either. Namely, that the law now
means the Father gets automatic 50/50 time-sharing.
The appellate courts have specifically ruled that the
language of the statute does not compel a Judge
As you can see, the law promotes equality and to implement an equal time-sharing plan. So on the
specifically prohibits a presumption in favor of the one side, while the legislature has shaded towards
mother for time-sharing purposes. language that logically means 50-50 plans, the Judiciary
The historic imbalance (and hence the perception) is a
by-product of historical paradigms which are changing.
Once upon a time it was commonplace for the Father
has reserved the power to the Courts to determine a
parenting plan that is in the best interests of the child,
and divide the time-sharing however the judge sees fit.
to be away working, and the Mother spending the Because the best-interests-of-the-child statutory factors
overwhelming majority of time with the children. So are amongst the most numerous of the domestic
when it came time for a Judge to consider the best relations analysis factors, the best course of action to
interest factors (such as routine, and knowledge of achieve the type of parenting plan you desire is to hire
the children’s records) the Mother held a distinct an experienced attorney, who is familiar with all 20
advantage. factors the court will have to consider.
Another reason for the historical imbalance is Florida’s This article is written by Marc Dwyer, a Senior Partner at
legitimacy laws (which I will discuss in another article). Chiumento Dwyer Hertel Grant, PL
“
THE LAW PROMOTES EQUALITY AND SPECIFICALLY
PROHIBITS A PRESUMPTION IN FAVOR OF THE
MOTHER FOR TIME-SHARING PURPOSES.”
V O L U S I A parent M A G A Z I N E | 21