If divorce were only about you and your ex, you could go your silent, separate ways. No more having to compromise, negotiate, or listen to stories that have bored you for years. No more arguing, fuming, or fighting to be heard. No more “talking about it” when you just want to go ahead and do things your own way. But if you have children, co-parenting without talking won’t be so convenient.

Compared to custody and parenting arrangements from only a few decades ago, co-parenting is like a ‘180.’ No single parent is in charge, and focus is on the highest good of the children.

f divorce were only about you and your ex, you could go your silent, separate ways. No more having to compromise, negotiate, or listen to stories that have bored you for years. No more arguing, fuming, or fighting to be heard. No more “talking about it” when you just want to go ahead and do things your own way. But if you have children, co-parenting without talking won’t be so convenient.

Compared to custody and parenting arrangements from only a few decades ago, co-parenting is like a ‘180.’ No single parent is in charge, and focus is on the highest good of the children.

The key component to co-parenting is healthy communication. And, considering you may have divorced because of unhealthy communication, it may sound crazy to expect the two of you rise to the occasion now.

There can be a number of reasons that parents stop talking after a divorce. Jobs, personal schedules, new partners, shame, jealousy, incompatible communication styles, and even outright dislike for one another can cut the communication lines.

There are additional parenting options for co-parenting. Without talking to one another, you and your ex will have extra challenges if you choose to go the co-parenting route. And no matter which model you choose, you will both have to rise to the task of putting your children first.

Why is co-parenting without talking such an oxymoron? Because co-parenting is built around the assumption of healthy communication. In fact, the twelve characteristics of healthy co-parenting all tie back to this essential.


Here are a few key components to healthy co-parenting.

Open dialogue between parents 
Schedule and rule changes don’t go through the kids. They are handled between the parents first. (Sounds like being married, doesn’t it?)

No bad-mouthing of the other parent
That goes for the kids as well as for you. Your kids are still evolving into their identities, and both of their parents contribute to that lasting sense of self. Remind them of what’s good in the other parent, and save your personal issues for your support group.

Consistency with rules in both households
This is one of the most distinguishing characteristics of co-parenting compared to parallel parenting.

You are trying to make your kids’ lives consistent, dependable, and at least somewhat predictable. Your goal isn’t to trump your ex’s rules on homework, but to give your kids a sense of a unified homefront, despite two households.

Amicable interactions at school and in public
Don’t embarrass your kids. Don’t make them dread having both parents present at their sporting events and birthday parties. Be the adult you are trying to raise your kids to be.

So, if raising kids demands so much communication from parents who have no interest in speaking with one another, is co-parenting without talking possible? And if it is, what can you expect in the way of pros and cons?

The key to healthy co-parenting may be communication. But communication can be packaged in a variety of ways.

If you and your ex are truly committed to co-parenting vs. sole guardianship or parallel parenting, then you have to rise to the occasion. You may not feel warm and fuzzy about chatting on the phone or making nice in person. But you do have to choose how you will communicate – text, email, online schedulers – and commit to doing so in a healthy way.

What are some pros to co-parenting without talking?

You can focus only on your kids
As long as you are committed to the happiness and welfare of your kids, you can make co-parenting work with some detachment.

If you are still stewing over marital hurts, you may not be ready to enter into conversation with your ex. But make sure your interactions are respectful, non-sarcastic, and completely focused on what’s best for the kids.

You don’t risk provoking or being provoked
It can take years to process a divorce, even with the greatest intention to do so. And during that time, the mere sound of an ex’s voice – his/her, word choice, innuendos – can be a tigger, It doesn’t take much to “go back there” when talking with an ex you still resent or don’t fully trust, let alone like.

If you choose co-parenting without talking, you can keep matters businesslike and child-focused. No emotion. No squabbling. No escalations.

• You have greater distance and emotional detachment from your ex. 

Talking connects people. If it didn’t, it wouldn’t be so integral to creating intimacy.

Even negative talking is a connector in that it attaches you to the energy of what is said and how it is said. Verbal abuse wouldn’t be so damaging if that weren’t the case.

By not having to talk with your ex by phone or in person, you can detach from that verbal energy. And hopefully, with time and self-examination, you can both heal from the negative emotions connected to your relationship.

• You have a plan to live by…in writing.

If you aren’t going to talk, you’re going to have to write. And that means documentation. Texts, emails, written notes, online schedulers, shared correspondence with teachers and doctors – you have information in black-and-white. 

“I will be picking Lucy up from school at 2:00 to go to Dr. Caldwell’s.” “Today’s soccer practice has been cancelled due to rain.” “I will be overseas on business Tuesday. Will you send notes from the parent-teacher meeting?”
It’s all about the kids.

Obviously there are also cons to co-parenting without talking. After all, the ideal arrangement involves open communication between both parents.

Even with the above positives, there are going to be some negatives

• You risk not presenting a unified front

The benefit of a text is that it tends to be to-the-point and lacking in emotion (excluding multiple exclamation points and orange-faced emojis).

The drawback of a text is that it tends to be to-the-point and lacking in emotion. It also lacks details that are more easily expressed in verbal communication.

A key element of co-parenting is consistency between households. And that means that, even without being married, parents have to present a unified front.

This is especially important as kids enter their teens and become more independent. They will inevitably test and push boundaries. And both parents will have to stand together as one in establishing rules and doling out discipline. Again, focus on the kids.

• You risk using your kids as a channel for communication 

You are still responsible for communicating with your ex first on all matters regarding rules and schedules for your kids.

Talking takes less time than sending emails or logging into an online account. And it can be tempting to tell your kid, “Tell your dad we need to rearrange our weeks because of the upcoming trip to Grandma’s.

This becomes a slippery slope into using your children as a go-between in your relationship with your ex.

• It’s more difficult to maintain consistency between homes

If you were still married, you would most likely verbalize the little things that make a big difference. Now that you need to uphold rules and make consistent changes across two households, not talking can pose a big challenge.

• It’s more difficult to resolve issues involving your kids’ behavior 

Your pre-pubescent 12-year-old isn’t a toddler anymore. And, while his behavior as a pre-teen may make you wonder, he needs different parenting now than he did then. And that includes (especially) direction and discipline regarding behavior and choices.

If you were still married, do you think you would be able to accomplish this effectively by leaving Post-It notes for your spouse? Co-parenting without talking doesn’t make it any easier.

• Your kids don’t get to watch their parents model healthy conflict resolution and civil behavior

Ideally, co-parented children get to observe their divorced parents resolving differences in a healthy, effective way. They get to experience a sense of family in public without being embarrassed, ashamed, or afraid.

They grow up knowing that their parents love, support, and prioritize them. And they learn how to become healthy, communicative adults themselves in the process of growing up.

When you are co-parenting without talking, your children lose this experiential learning. They see little to no communication between their parents, and therefore have to learn those essential relationship and parenting skills elsewhere.

Parenting is the most demanding, important job in the world. And those demands and importance don’t dwindle after a divorce.

While co-parenting may be the ideal arrangement for children, the parents have to be prepared and committed to what is required of it. Co-parenting without talking, while not ideal, is definitely possible. But it does require mutual commitment, diligence, and respect.

We extend our thanks to Dr. Karen Finn for this article

NEED HELP?
Don’t forget if your self representing and needing low cost help with your family law matter or even just trying to work out a fair dinkum parenting plan with the ex – drop our fabulous paralegal Abbey a line at –  abbey@TheLegalEagle.com.au
or
Make an appointment to have a chat with Australia’s friendliest family lawyer Mark Bradbury HERE

Why do lawyers charge such exorbitant amounts in family law matters?
It’s a compelling question and one I get asked quite a bit.
With present day fees for even the most junior of lawyers starting at around $300 per hour and senior lawyers and partners charging amounts north of $500-600 dollars plus, it can be a financially crippling experience retaining any family lawyer.

And family law cases very often involve at least one party that is vulnerable both emotionally and financially, so the decision to use a lawyer is one that a client makes only because they need expertise and a speedy resolution …so they can avoid being left penniless.

However, penniless is often what hirers of lawyers become.
Going into debt and selling assets to keep large legal bills in check seems to be a regular occurrence and clients are always faced with the prospect of a lawyer bailing out if their gargantuan fees aren’t met.

Even though lawyers seldom share the mystery behind the high fees, they might try to explain those fees to you something like this…
Well, I sacrificed a great deal and did a lot of training to get to the position I am in today as an experienced family lawyer. Some may even use the title “accredited family law specialist” when speaking of such “experience”, even though that simply means a lawyer who’s been around for a while and sat for a short 3 hour accreditation test. (Sorry I had put the length of the test in as one newly minted specialist wasn’t happy with me referring to 3 hours as “short”. Go figure!) 

They might also put their fees down to their on-going requirement to attend costly continual professional development; their indemnity insurance (in case you sue them) and the renewal costs relating to their memberships and practicing certificates.

Additionally, when you walk into that lovely office with the friendly receptionist, the helpful paralegal and the shiny buttoned Chesterfield sofas, you can imagine that too adds to the price point!

But the hourly fee never includes all the “extras” that end up on your toilet roll length invoice. These often include the filing fees, the stationary costs, the postage, and the one that gives me a real laugh- the $4 a page photocopying. And don’t forget every cost, including the lawyers fee, attracts the 10% GST.

So is the product or service that you get worth the cost?

I truly believe in about 30% of matters, where there is a real complexity, difficult negotiations or large property settlements, it is.
As one commentator noted, when you sign a retainer agreement with your lawyer, you are assigning your worries and problems to them – so that you can go home, spend some time with your family and sleep peacefully in the knowledge that your lawyer has in fact ‘got this’.

Meanwhile, that really good lawyer is busting their ass stressing about your deadlines; completing all that tricky paperwork; writing your highly impressive affidavit with all your evidence neatly laid out the way the court requires it; dealing with your uncomfortable phone calls; and doing that negotiating on your behalf so your matter can be resolved.

And when your matter is highly complex and you’re out of your depth, they are worth every penny.

What about the other 70% of cases that I hear about day in day out? These are the people who often turn to me when their lawyer has not done much, or convinced them to fight a losing battle rather than negotiate, or been a poor communicator; or even worse, left them high and dry once the bills can’t be paid.
I have lost count of the people who have a poor impression of these members of my fraternity.

So what’s the best way to avoid the sky high fees? 


The two solutions that come to mind are: 
Fixed fee agreements
or… the most cost effective way-
Self representing with document/drafting assistance and court coaching like we do at The Legal Eagle.

Fixed fee agreements

These agreements mean you don’t have to worry about essentially signing a blank cheque for your lawyer to rack up billable hours. These types of agreements would generally be available for work such as preparing leases and legal wills, conveyancing and divorce applications.
There are various kinds of fixed fee arrangements, including where the client pays a lump sum up front, ‘staged’ payments at various points and ‘capped’ fees where there’s a guaranteed maximum total price for the whole case.
Lewis-Dermody recommends opting for a fixed fee agreement wherever possible, as lawyers can be under pressure from their employer to inflate clients’ bills due to the internal performance targets they’ve been set.
Self Representing
Most people have tremendous capacity to self represent with the right background help and assistance. It can be a little intimidating turning up to court but if all your documents and applications have been prepared by an experienced legal drafter you will feel pretty confident in court. You see getting the docs right is the key because these often relate to what you want from the court (your application and orders) and the evidence (your affidavit) you have to back that application up.
Good legal drafters also tend to be experienced lawyers, yet don’t charge nearly as much as a full service lawyer because they are not officially retained by a client to do court work and give extensive advice.
Finally, there are those cowboy (and girl) lawyers who offer deals that say “no win, no fee”. Seriously Eaglets, avoid these ones like the plague. They are only interested in sure wins and if you do reach their easy win criteria (and they resolve your matter) you will pay such a high percentage fee that they will be laughing all the way to the bank with YOUR settlement money.

Gosh… that’s a nice Chesterfield sofa! $$$$$$

Good solutions
If you need assistance and want to self represent, let us help you.
We take a genuine interest in the outcome you need… and our rates are very reasonable.
Our lawyer Mark has been helping self representers with their documents for over 6 years.
You can make a FREE appointment HERE or drop our wonderful lead paralegal Abbey a line – abbey@TheLegalEagle.com.au

There are so many unsolved mysteries that continue to baffle and bewilder humankind. Who was Jack the Ripper? Where is the lost city of Atlantis? Why was Stonehenge created? Oh and a favourite of mine, who framed Roger Rabbit? However, there is no more perplexing and exasperating mystery to unravel than…What exactly are the “best interests” of the child.

If you’ve been there, and I assume many of you have, you will time and time again hear lawyers, family consultants and Judges all espouse the same tired old mantra. The problem is that experience has taught me there is no real practical way to interpret what those best interests are.

As a consequence of this, much uncertainty prevails. But one thing is for certain and that is the “best interests” principle is to this day used to affect a wide variety of preferences about children’s custody. The fallout in applying this vague expression without clarity or consistency means that one parent often gets the sharp end of the stick. I can assure you these parents are often left gobsmacked by the court’s decisions.

How do you decipher what it means? 
Deciding what is best for a child poses a question no less ultimate than the purposes and values of life itself. Should a judge primarily be concerned with the child’s happiness? Or with the child’s spiritual and religious training? Or with their health? Or education? Or with the amount of interruption travel between parents may cause? So much to consider by Judges, all with different styles and opinions, often results in “dog’s breakfast” rulings and orders.

So what does the Family Law Act (FLA) say about “best interests”? Surely the legislation can point parents, lawyers and Judges in the right direction.
Well we know that the FLA requires the court to regard the best interests of the child as the paramount consideration when making parenting orders. And section 60CC of the FLA states that the primary considerations are the benefit to the child of having a meaningful relationship with both of the child’s parents; and the need to protect the child from physical or psychological harm from being subjected to, or exposed to, abuse, neglect or family violence.

With regard to violence, the FLA also states that greater weight is given to keeping a child away from violence than having good co-parenting. The problem here is that there are often allegations made in affidavits by both mums and dads against each other in regards to physical and psychological violence towards the children. Deciphering these allegations causes much delay in working out what best parenting outcomes would be. In saying that, I am not against the court taking time to investigate but I am against allegations being used as a tactic by one party, with little evidence to back it up.

Real meaningful relationships involve both parents
So where there isn’t issues with violence, the court should be clear. A “meaningful” relationship with both of the parents should involve, where possible, co-parenting in the true meaning of the word. To be even clearer, where it is possible and circumstances permit, children should be spending considerable amounts of time with each parent every week.

Now some of you are saying, hang on that’s just not physically possible. I hear you, but children adapt to and like routine in their lives and if you both can negotiate a way to ensure reasonable time is spend with the non- primary carer parent by giving them overnights and part (and occasional full) weekends you will have a parenting plan with little opening for complaint. And if you both live near each other splitting weeks can also be doable with good planning and a routine. Children in most cases want to see both their parents, if they are denied that they face emotional health issues and the other parent faces ostracisation and most probably emotional health issues as well.

Additional ingredients and the child’s voice
The FLA, just to confuse parents even more, then lists all the additional considerations the court can (not must) take into consideration. Of these, the ones I feel are most important are a child’s right to express their views on parenting, with greater weight obviously being given to a teenager’s point of view than a 3 year old. For years I have advocated the child’s voice being heard and not through some report a family consultant does after a 20 minute observation session. I mean seriously, children are more articulate today than when I was as a kid. If you’ve got a 6 year old you know what I mean. In their own unique way they can express themselves very clearly. How we move forward in getting a proper forum for children to do this is another conversation.
The other additional consideration I really think is important as a best interests of the child factor is ensuring that child has contact with their extended family. So much love on offer here and from mostly partisan relatives who don’t carry the grudge factor parents sometimes have with each other.

Naturally, there are a lot of other well meaning additional considerations but they are additional and often overcrowd and turn into a mystery what those core “best interests of the children” should be about.
What we really need for simplicities sake is an agenda centred around great co-parenting and the preservation of contact with a child’s extended family. People may not stay as couples forever, but their children deserve a family for life.

If you are interested in my feelings on dodgy child consultants and ICLs click HERE

And for ideas on the “perfect parenting plan” click HERE.

At The Legal Eagle we have lots of free resources in family law please come and visit our very popular site.

DO YOU NEED HELP?
We also provide low cost assistance to self representers and people who have had enough of sky high legal bills.
You can make a free appointment to find out more HERE.