Despite lawyers’ and judges’ best efforts to draft precise legal decision-making and parenting time orders, issues may arise between \u00a0parents which are not addressed in the court orders. \u00a0For example, parents may disagree about how and where the children will exchange \u00a0from one parent to the other. \u00a0Parents may disagree regarding dividing school breaks or minor holidays not addressed in their parenting plan. \u00a0Believe it or not, the parents in one of my cases could not even agree on how to cut their child’s hair!<\/p>\n
When parents cannot resolve disagreements on their own, their usual remedy is to file a post-decree petition with the court to modify or enforce the existing court orders. \u00a0The traditional litigation process, however, is inefficient, time-consuming and expensive. \u00a0Hiring lawyers to take minor issues to the judge for resolution often just simply doesn’t make sense.<\/p>\n
An alternative to taking minor disputes back to the judge is to have a third party appointed to arbitrate and resolve such issues. \u00a0Rule 74 of the Arizona Rules of Family Law Procedure authorizes the appointment of a “parenting coordinator” as a quasi-judicial third party to resolve certain limited disputes between parents. \u00a0Parenting coordinators are typically psychologists, therapists or experienced family law attorneys. \u00a0The scope of a parenting coordinator’s authority is limited under the Rule. \u00a0 Parenting coordinators may not change legal decision-making authority or substantially change parenting time. \u00a0They may, however, make decisions “regarding parenting time challenges not specified in the parenting plan that the parents are unable to resolve. \u00a0By way of example, these challenges can include disagreements about: \u00a0pick-up and drop-off locations, dates and times; holiday scheduling; discipline; health issues; personal care issues; school and extracurricular activities; choice of schools; and managing problematic behaviors . . . .”\u00a0see Rule 74 H.1.c., ARFLP<\/em>.<\/p>\n Before January 1, 2016, judges could appoint parenting coordinators any time they felt a parenting coordinator would be helpful. \u00a0In addition, before January 1, 2016, a parenting coordinator could only make recommendations, which either party could challenge before the judge. \u00a0As of January 1, 2016, however, a parenting coordinator may only be appointed when both parties agree. \u00a0Additionally, as long as the parenting coordinator acts within the scope of the parenting coordinator’s authority, the parenting coordinator’s decisions are binding.<\/p>\n Since the parenting coordinator rules changed on January 1, 2016, many of my colleagues have been reluctant to agree to the appointment of a parenting coordinator. \u00a0Specifically, they are uncomfortable with the idea that the parenting coordinator’s decisions will be final and binding–that there will be no judicial review or right to appeal.<\/p>\n While clients certainly must be advised that a parenting coordinator’s decisions within the scope of her authority are binding, \u00a0I believe many lawyers are unduly concerned about this. \u00a0After all, the parenting coordinator will not–and may<\/em> not under the Rule–make any decision which changes legal decision-making or substantially alters parenting time. \u00a0And isn’t the whole point to obtain a quick and inexpensive resolution of minor disputes without involving lawyers and judges?<\/p>\n What’s more, there are several retired judges who now serve as parenting coordinators. \u00a0I have used one of these retired judges as a parenting coordinator on a couple of my cases recently, and I am completely confident delegating to her the issues that fall within the scope of a parenting coordinator’s authority. \u00a0She has over twenty years of judicial experience, many of those years being on the family court bench, and she certainly can resolve issues as capably as the judges currently on the bench.<\/p>\n Procedurally, presenting an issue to a parenting coordinator is quite simple. \u00a0Once the parenting coordinator is appointed, when a dispute arises, the aggrieved parent contacts the parenting coordinator via e-mail or via a telephone or in-office meeting. \u00a0After hearing the aggrieved parent’s position, the parenting coordinator receives the other parent’s position and version of events. \u00a0After each parent has been fully heard, the parenting coordinator issues a written decision, which is promptly adopted by the judge as an official court order. \u00a0While the parties do share the cost of the parenting coordinator’s fees, the parties do not need to hire lawyers or to engage in long, drawn out court battles.<\/p>\n In short, parenting coordinators are a valuable resource. \u00a0Compared to hiring lawyers, filing \u00a0motions and engaging in courtroom litigation before a judge, the parenting coordinator process is highly efficient and yields substantial savings in terms of time and money. \u00a0 As long as parents are advised as to its binding nature, the parenting coordinator process should be considered as a viable means to address and resolve minor parenting disputes.<\/p>\n – – – – – Despite lawyers’ and judges’ best efforts to draft precise legal decision-making and parenting time orders, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[108],"tags":[143,66,67,68],"class_list":["post-3054","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-child-custody","tag-judges","tag-parenting-coordinators","tag-parenting-plan","tag-parenting-time"],"yoast_head":"\n
\n\u00a9 2017 J. Kyle Scoresby, P.C. All rights reserved.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"