Technology helps parents stay in contact with children

by ELIZABETH PIERSON HERNANDEZ/VALLEY MORNING STAR

KEEPING IN TOUCH - Texas House Bill 1864 allows judges in child-custody cases to order access between parent and child using wired or wireless technology, including phones, e-mail, instant messaging, teleconferencing or Web cameras. John Speer who lives in Palm Valley and is divorced, has set up a webcam on his laptop to communicate with two of his three children, Betsy Speer, 12, and Trevor Speer, 11, who live with their mother in Winfield, Illinois.

John Speer is in his Palm Valley kitchen giving a cooking lesson to two of his kids, showing them just how easy it is to make Caprese Salad, an Italian dish he loved to eat when he lived in Chicago's Little Italy.

He slices the tomatoes just so. He shows them the basil he's grown in his herb garden. Then he'll add the mozzarella cheese, olive oil, oregano and capers.

He is alone in his kitchen but he can see and hear Betsy, 12, and Trevor, 11, and they him, through the Web cameras they're using for weekly virtual visitations between the Rio Grande Valley and Illinois, where the children live.

Parents like Speer who don't have full custody of their children could increasingly be awarded virtual visitation in divorce cases because of a Texas law that became effective Sept 1st, 2007. Texas Family Code 153.015, Electronic Communication with Child by conservator.

The law says that judges can order electronic visits using any wired or wireless technology, including telephone, e-mail, Web cameras, instant messaging or videoconferencing.

The communication must not replace in-person visits, only supplement them.

Many judges already order phone and e-mail access between children and their out-of-the-home parent so they can talk about homework or say goodnight in between scheduled weekend and vacation visits.

But the idea of allowing visits by Web camera, e-mail, even telephones, was never spelled out in law, making it possible for judges to refuse to consider the possibility, said Rep. Veronica Gonzales, D-McAllen, author of the bill and an attorney who has practiced family law.

"A judge could just say, look it's not in the statute, it's not standard, it's outside my realm of my computer knowledge, we're not going to deal with it," Gonzales said. "But with it in the statute, the judge would have to acknowledge this as an option."

Texas becomes the third state, after Utah and Wisconsin, to legalize virtual visitation, Speer said. He worked to have the law passed with Sen. Eddie Lucio Jr., D-Brownsville, who then asked Gonzales to add it to one of her bills.

The law affects divorces settled in Texas courts. Speer's case was settled in Illinois and he worked out an agreement with his ex-wife to schedule the visits because it became too expensive for him to travel regularly to Illinois or fly his children to Texas, he said.

Speer, a media finance expert, moved back to the Valley to care for his ailing mother and connects weekly now with his children via the assistance of a webcam. Since the virtual visits began in August 2006, his relationship with his children has blossomed, he said. On the phone they responded to his questions with a series of grunts and one-word answers, as children are prone to do. With the camera, they come alive, he said.

Trevor has asked Speer to demonstrate how to use free weights so he can impress girls. Betsy is an avid reader and talks to him about books, he said.

"I'm no longer just a wallet at a distance," Speer said. "I'm now Dad. I'm at the table. I'm with them," he said.

It is dads who are most likely to benefit from the law since about 90 percent of non-custodial parents are men, said Norval Glenn, a professor of sociology at the University of Texas at Austin.

Too often, non-custodial parents pick up their children for a weekend and shower them with fun activities, which is kind, but does not resemble daily life, Glenn said. Regular communication improves relations, he said.

"This is how parents and children bond and how they establish a normal parent-child relationship, and if that's absent, it's more kind of like an uncle or aunt/niece or nephew interaction," Glenn said.

In cases where the parents do not work together for the best interest of the children, no amount of electronic communication can solve complex family problems, Glenn said.

In 2003, more than 84,000 divorces were declared in Texas, affecting 67,000 children, according to data from the Texas Department of State Health Services.

Veronica Farias, a family law attorney in Brownsville, said telephone visits and exchange of cell phone numbers are commonly agreed to in court, but she has never seen a judge order visits by Web camera. She plans to start asking for the visits, she said.

Even parents who live in the same county as their children and see them regularly would "be thrilled" to have more contact, she said.

"By the time you pick up your kids, take them to Luby's or Chuck E. Cheese's, it's so limited," she said. "Fifteen minutes for a little extra, 'how was your day?' or 'Did you get your report card?' and I think that would create a lot more unity."

The bill was meant to put a stop to cases where custodial parents block access the child has to the other parent, even though a judge has allowed the contact, said Sen. Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa, D-McAllen, who sponsored the bill in the Senate and has practiced family law.

"Many times parents who have custody were prohibiting their children from e-mailing with the other parent, or calling, and that's not right," Hinojosa said. "We have to protect that right."

Speer said he and his ex-wife had fought in the past about how much long-distance access he should have to his children. She didn't want the Web camera in the home, so he found a neutral site, a family center, near their Illinois home, equipped it with a Web camera, and she agreed to take the children there for their weekly visits.

He's trying to identify a neutral site in the Rio Grande Valley to equip with a Web camera so other families can make similar arrangements, he said.

Speer said the virtual visits could never replace hugs, but in his family they have re-introduced his children to him. Sessions like the salad lesson give them access to another parent's perspective, he said.

"It's one of the various things that Dad can offer something that maybe their mother is not offering," he said. "This is not in competition, but to augment what they're getting."

Read: Texas Family Code § 153.015 Electronic Communication With Child By Conservator

Why fathers should not request jail time the 1st time they take mothers to court

by Casey Alexander

What separates TFER from most father's rights organizations is our philosophical approach to the problems created by the child custody industry. You will not see us picketing outside the Tarrant County courthouse or crying about the unfairness of laws in a courtroom (the time and place for that is during the legislative session in Austin, Texas). You will not see us pushing martyrdom* by encouraging fathers to violate court orders because the orders are unfair and do jail time just to prove a point.In short, our approach is to define the individuals problem and solve it. Plain and simple. As one certain Tarrant County family court presiding judge put it, TFER has become and organization about "solving problems and not making noise."

At TFER, we know you will come to our office unless you are having problems. It will be a cold day in hell when a father comes through our doors and says, "I want to join your organization. My ex-wife is so incredibly reasonable. I am so happy with my current divorce decree and the Attorney General is so incredibly helpful that I just have to join." No, if you are in our office, you have a problems.....big problems.

One problem we see at TFER is mothers (and sometimes fathers) denying fathers (and sometimes mothers) their court ordered possession and access, hereafter referred to as visitation. Denial of visitation is a very common problem and we take a unique approach to the problem.If you come to a lawyer with this problem, you will probably hear the terms "motion for enforcement" and "contempt of court". Many attorneys address the problem of visitation denial by requesting that the other parent be thrown in jail. We don't agree with this approach. Yes, many fathers have been thrown in jail for violating child support orders but two wrongs do not make a right. At TFER, we believe that in most cases a first time solution to the problem of being denied court ordered visitation should not be a request for jail time. Instead, we encourage our members to request a modification of their orders that will limit the opportunity the other parent has to deny you visitation of your children.

We encourage you to ask the judge to modify the orders as follows:

1. Change the drop off times to the time child returns to school. This gives you Thursday (or Wednesday) overnights (instead of 6:00 to 8:00) and gives you Sunday overnights instead of returning them at 8:00 pm! Change the place of the pick up and drop offs (on the days the child is in school) to the child's school. Change the place of the pick up and drop offs (on the days the child is not in school) to a supervised exchange facility that will monitor both parent's compliance of the visitation order.
2. This approach is extremely effective. If your children are school age, then you (or any competent adult you designate) are picking them up from their school. It is much harder for a parent to deny the other parent visitation from a school then from their own house. They would have to withdraw the children from school early to deny your visitation and in doing so would create indisputable documentation for your next hearing (the hearing in which you really do request jail time). The other parent probably realizes this. If your children are not school age, or on those days your children are not in school, the visitation takes place at a supervised exchange center. These places document when each parent shows up. Again, if the other parent doesn't show up then he or she has created indisputable evidence against themselves for the next hearing. Again, the other parent realizes this.

TFER advocates this approach for the following reasons:

1. The first (and weakest) reason is that judges rarely put mothers (or fathers) in jail the first time they are found guilty of violating a visitation order so why ask them to? Go to court to win. Not to prove a point.
2. The second (and strongest) reason is that it is probably not in the best interest of your children to ask a judge to throw their mother in jail. Now, if you are experiencing the problem of visitation denial your response to this might be, "Well, denying me my visitation with my children is not in their best interest either!", to which I respond, "Two wrongs don't make a right!" Your children do not need the internal conflict of knowing their father (who they love) tried to get their mother (who they love) thrown in jail. Their is enough grief in their lives already because their parents are not together and don't think for a moment that this is not heartbreaking for them.
3. The third reason is that it works. Nearly all of our members who have taken this approach no longer experience the problem of visitation denial. This approach sends a message loud and clear to the parent who has been denying visitation. Often times at the modification hearing, the judge will make it plain and simple to the other parent what will happen at the next hearing regarding denial of visitation......jail time.

I've been called words that begin with "p", "w", and "b" for advocating this stance within our organization but it has caught fire and we are experiencing great success doing it. These people who want to take the same adversarial approach to enforcing visitation as private attorneys and state agencies take to enforce child support have one thing in common which makes me care less about their opinions. These people do not get that two wrongs do not make a right! If you don't agree with this approach I encourage you to ask yourself the following question, "Is my goal to punish the other parent or is my goal to be able to see my children?"

God bless our children.

* I use the word martyrdom because I actually heard a member of another fathers rights organization say that his going to jail for being behind on child support would be a good thing for his daughter because it would show her what a bitch his ex-wife truly was! He referred to this organization as a bunch of P****** for taking the approach we do regarding visitation enforcement. Of course, within 24 hours of being incarcerated he was calling this organization pleading for help. He ran up over $100.00 in collect phone call charges from jail promising to pay it back which he never did. He is a classic example of two wrongs don't make a right. In my opinion, both he and his ex-wife are ruining that child's life.

Divorce

Don't Dare Use the "V" Word!

by Casey Alexander

A pointless rant about the ongoing annoyance of politically correct and incorrect terms

I'd like to start this editorial by first saying that I mean no disrespect to the judge I am about to quote. He seems to try to keep children's best interest in mind when making a ruling and quite frankly I just get a good feeling about his integrity and character. In short, I like the guy. However (there's always a however, huh?), he did say one thing that made me scratch my head.

The other night, at Texas Fathers For Equal Rights, we had the above mentioned Tarrant County family court judge speak at one of our meetings. One of our members was describing his situation to the judge and the member said something like this, "First of all, I'm not in a custody battle yet.......but, I'm at least trying to get visitation with my son."

"Wait a second", interrupted the judge, "Let's analyze what you just said. 'Custody battle'? Why do you have it refer to it as a battle? Your child doesn't need to be in the middle of a battle."

Good point, I thought to myself. The word "battle" seems a little strong considering there is an innocent child in the middle. I believe words are more powerful then we know and sometimes one can say something very prophetic without realizing it. Freudian slips are alive and well. Perhaps this guy can avoid a battle.

Then the judge said, "And don't call it 'visitation'. That just makes it sound like you are only visiting your child. You are his father. Call it possession."

RED FLAG. Possession?

Now, I realize that "visitation" is referred to as "possession and access" in the Texas Family Code. However, if we are going to choose politically correct terms and our only choices are visitation and possession, I think I'll go with visitation when it comes to my son. I'd rather visit him then possess him. I'd like to possess all the cool playstation games he has at his mother's house.

The political incorrectness of the term "visitation" is bought to us by the same group of people who, "Don't use your child as a pawn." and "Don't use your child as a means to an end." In other words, treat your child like a person and not an object.

Now, which verb makes a child sound more like an object....."possess" or "visit"? I mean, many people have referred to me as "the devil himself" (especially a few mothers who are now paying child support and a couple of former board members) but I don't think I really have the power to actually possess a person do I? Trust me, if I had that power I would be floating around in the spirit world at the Tarrant County Court House jumping into the souls of lawyers, judges and ............ never mind.

Back to my point. It's too bad their is not a single word in the English dictionary for "quality time with my child because I love him* ."

Another thing that annoys me: There are judges who jump every time a party uses the phrase "my child" instead of "our child". Please. Aren't there more important things then semantics when a judge is ruling on where a child is going to live?

When you are in the grocery store and you speak to a person about your son's little league game and that person is not familiar with your son's name then you say, "My son hit a home run the other day." You don't say, "Our son hit a home run the other day," and certainly the grocery clerk doesn't slam a gavel shaped cucumber onto the cash register and remind you that every child has two parents and neither of you own (but somehow take turns possessing) the child.

OK folks. Here comes a politically incorrect statement. It is completely innocent, completely appropriate and the fact that I utter it says NOTHING about what type of father I am. However, in a courtroom, it could very well influence some people's opinion of my ability to parent. Ready? Here it goes.............

"I really enjoyed VISITING with MY son at his school the other day."

Heaven forbid. Call CPS.

The information contained on this website is for information purposes only.

This information is not a substitute for the advice of an attorney.

By: Kiri Martin, Attorney at Law

Previously known as a temporary order or a final order, ?Parenting plans? became creatures of statute in Texas on September 1, 2005. The 2005 Texas state legislature passed into law 11 Family Code additions and 3 Family Code modifications, found in Subchapter J of Chapter 153 of the Texas Family Code, Sections 153.601 through 153.611; and Sections 153.007; 153.133; and 153.134. Through these, the Texas legislature seeks to protect children from the stresses, strains, and unfair burdens of family law litigation by helping parents resolve their current and future parenting issues now, thereby cutting down on the need for future litigation, and by encouraging parents to participate in the development of their parenting plan and to share in the rights and duties of raising their child after the parents have separated or dissolved their marriage, and by changing our vernacular to encourage the use of such inclusive phrases as parenting time and parenting plan instead of visitation and court order, all of which in turn promotes the best interest of children, which in itself is Texas public policy.

It may be a partial unemployment act for family law attorneys who understand the desirability of cutting down on certain areas of family law litigation to advance the welfare of the child and the family above all.

Please note that Parenting plans do not apply to Attorney General cases.

The term ?Parenting plan? itself is specifically defined in section 153.601(4) as a temporary or final order that sets outs the rights and duties of parents in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship and include provisions relating to conservatorship, possession of and access to a child, and child support, but now specifically require a dispute resolution process to minimize future disputes. All temporary and final orders that deal with conservatorship in a SAPCR must incorporate a parenting plan. If the parties cannot agree on a temporary parenting plan, the court can send them to mediation or other alternative dispute resolution methods to try to establish one. Family violence is still the exception to the mediation requirement. Specifically in this context, an allegation of family violence without a requested hearing on the matter by either party will waive the mediation requirement ?or- a finding by the court after a hearing on the matter by a preponderance of the evidence that family violence has occurred will also waive the mediation requirement. Barring that, if the parties do mediate at the pre-temporary parenting plan stage and still do not reach an agreement, a party can then request to be placed on the ?rocket docket? or in other words he can request an expedited, preferentially-set or hurried-up hearing for the COURT to fashion a temporary parenting plan FOR the parents.

This process repeats itself at the final order stage.

Courts have found that by far, the vast majority of lawsuits filed in family law courts are modification lawsuits. Many of them can be seen as the result of the parents? poor communication, lack of flexibility, lack of provisions in their order, or refusal to cooperate, whether for legitimate reasons or not. The new parenting plan laws understand that every family is as unique as a fingerprint. They are intended to prevent parents from having to go to court to get an order on how to live the details of their daily, post-separation and post-divorce lives that were not otherwise provided for in their court?s cookie-cutter order made by a judge who has never met the child yet who must act in the child?s best interest because the parents cannot or will not agree, again, whether for legitimate reasons or not. Whatever the unfeasibility, undesirability, or disadvantage of sitting down with your ex spouse, soon-to-be-ex spouse, or other parent, the truth is that the two of you should know your children better than a judge. You should know their needs, demands, strengths, and weaknesses, and that they need active participation by both parents. You NOW need a new framework in your life - - and one that allows for all of this. AN experienced family law attorney can help you craft a parenting plan that is both specific and flexible, that works whether the parents are co-parenting well or not, and that encourages reviews and adjustments after one year to see what has worked and what has not, and then again every 2-3 years thereafter to provide for changing needs.

Agree on as much as you can. Include provisions for the plan to self-modify outside of court. Parties should be aware, however, that certain plan provisions, even though agreed to by the parties, may not be later enforced by a court. Examples include plans that try to change the standard that a court would use to rule on a modification request based on a desire to relocate, or plan provisions about a child?s religious upbringing. However, statistics show that parents who participate in reaching an agreement are 80% more likely to follow the agreement than if a court ordered it.

Enforcement issues aside, by law, in order for the court to adopt the agreed parenting plan as the order of the court, the parents must agree in the plan to resolve any future disputes through methods such as mediation or arbitration before filing a lawsuit, except in an emergency. The plan must also, at a minimum (1) establish the rights and duties of each parent with respect to the child, (2) minimize the child?s exposure to harmful parental conflict, (3) provide for the child?s changing needs as the child grows and matures in a way that minimizes the need for further modifications to the final parenting plan, and (4) provide for a dispute resolution process or other voluntary dispute resolution procedures before court action, barring family violence.

The final parenting plan must specifically state that preference shall be given to carrying out the parenting plan, and that the parties shall use the designated processes to resolve disputes.

Many (but not all) of the provisions to now include in your parenting plan are already part of standard Texas orders. The existing Texas Family Code is far more detailed than most other states, and already provides for such things as a parenting schedule THAT: (1) anticipates school breaks, holidays, and summer vacations, (2) defines when holidays and weekends start and stop, (3) remembers to include Mother?s Day or Father?s Day and birthdays; and (4) includes drop-off and pick-up times and locations. Can you imagine another state?s order that does not? Additionally, Texas orders routinely provide for (a) invasive, non-invasive, elective, or emergency medical and dental decision-making, (b) a specific address to which to send a child support payment, (c) the division of ongoing medical and dental insurance costs and uninsured costs for the children, (d) notification procedures to the other parent if a work or home address or telephone numbers or driver?s license number changes, (e) restrictions on future moves, (f) airline travel by a small child, (f) access to records through the school for things like reports cards, absence and tardy records, and calendars of special events, school activities and conferences, (i) special circumstances of alcohol and substance abuse, and (j) parent remarks and behavior. Can you imagine the litigation that would ensue over an order that did not provide for these?

Even though our current family law orders in Texas are and have been for years far more comprehensive and detailed than almost any other state, there is still room for improvement. Keep in mind the overarching goal of protecting children, involving parents, and cutting down on the need for future litigation by resolving current and future parenting issues now. Your individualized parenting plan exists to address additional areas that were not previously included automatically - - areas that so frequently cause disputes among divorced couples, such as transporting the child to certain extra-curricular activities or limiting telephone time with the child. As equally as important as addressing the foreseeable nuts-and-bolts, it can also address how future unforeseeable disputes will be resolved.

Every parent has or will have an unexpected emergency, schedule change, or request to work late on a special project. Many children have their own extra-curricular activities and after-school programs which fall on both parents? time. And EVERY child has and will have changing needs and wants as he or she ages.

In an ideal world, all parents would be flexible and understanding and work together to care for the children during these changes. This makes parenting seem more like real life to a child . . . instead of seeming like something different from the rest of his life.

If spontaneous flexibility and cooperation is not possible, however, advance planning through the parenting plan can help, preferably with the help of an experienced family law attorney. Each parent can individually map out his or her idea of the family?s post-divorce parenting issues, using a model plan that each parent can mark up and customize. Parents should also be aware of the unique needs of their children now. The plan should also contain options for a child?s future needs at different ages and developmental stages. This would involve incorporating assumptions that already exist in the field of child development.

Examples include (1) 50-50 parenting time and how to achieve it with a minimum number of transitions for the child; (2) adjusting child support to take this into account; (3) how to handle future anticipatable, foreseeable events 1-2 years out, including but not limited to short-notice business travel, family reunions, or other conflicts in schedules; (4) how to handle in a formulaic manner unforeseeable future events ? put it in a formula, such as rotation of responsibilities, a provision in there for short-term emergency caretaking of the child if something arises, you can designate a tiebreaker to make an unanticipated decision if there is an impasse - - a family doctor if the dispute is a medical one, a favorite teacher, guidance counselor, or coach if the dispute is an educational or after-school one, a mutually-trusted family member if the dispute concerns home life, or a pastor if the dispute is religious or is ethics-based. (5) who gets the tax deduction and when; (6) whether to require life insurance on each parent to benefit the child in the event of a death; (7) who pays for daycare and when; (8) whether to start a college fund, how to fund it, and in what amount, as well as how to select a college; (9) how to pre-approve or pay for a child?s extracurricular activity expenses such as automobile insurance, uniforms or musical instruments or whether certain extracurricular activities will be allowed at all, such as all terrain vehicles, street legal vehicles, tattoos, body piercings, etc. As a side note, most parents are not aware that the standard invasive medical procedure decisions awarded to one or both parents technically already include shots, tattoos and body piercings. This can be spelled out specifically; (10) whether these extra expenses are paid directly to the provider; (11) how to deal with delinquent extra expense payments that affect the child; (12) any restrictions on domestic or international travel such as forbidding puddle-jumper planes or travel to countries that are not signatories to the various and respective Hague Conventions or a deposit for the roundtrip cost to the other parent to pick up the child if necessary or other age-related travel costs and passport concerns; (13) notice of change in daycare; (14) notice of new relationships or people present with the children; (15) an agreement to not seek a change in parenting time solely because of a move; (16) future planning for loss of employment by or disability of a parent; (17) how and when to review and adjust child support; (18) adjusting parenting time for ages and stages of child development, particularly very young children and teenagers; (19) adjusting child support to give credit for parenting time; (20) terms of discipline of the child ? on this note, the 2005 legislature has added a new law that says that stepparents and grandparents can discipline a child now; (21) specific instances of parental behavior such as not using the child as a messenger, or, during the exchange, not fighting, using sarcasm, or demonstrating anger; (22) how to communicate with eachother about child issues such as sleep and eating schedule, medications, or other health matters; and (23) what to do if a parent is more than 30 minutes late to an exchange.

If the parties have not reached an agreement on a final parenting plan on or before the 30th day before the trial date, they each have to file with the court and serve on the other party a proposed final parenting plan of their own. Failure to do so by one parent may result in the court outright adopting the other parent?s plan. Each party must swear that his or her plan is proposed in good faith, and is in the child?s best interest, and must attach a sworn statement of income.

As of September 1, 2005 (with the exception of a lawsuit that only seeks to modify child support), every modification lawsuit that is filed to modify a previous order that did not fall under parenting plan laws must include the suing party?s proposed parenting plan. It must be filed with the court and served on the opposing party just like the modification. And the responding party must include the same in his or her answer. Whichever party pays child support must also attach a verified statement of income to the modification lawsuit along with the proposed parenting plan.

The attorney?s role is still to zealously advocate the desires of the client while providing counsel and maintaining the ethics, professionalism and integrity required of an officer of the Court. If the two proposed parenting plans (one by each parent) cannot be reconciled, a court appointed parenting coordinator is appropriate. A parenting coordinator is defined as an impartial third party appointed by the court to assist parties in resolving issues relating to parenting and other family issues arising from an order in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship. The new laws allow for but do not require the use of parenting coordinators to help the parents develop and implement a parenting plan in highly contentious cases that do NOT involve family violence. The family code defines ?high conflict case? as a SAPCR in which the parties demonstrate a pattern of repetitious litigation; anger and distrust; difficulty in communicating about and cooperating in the care of their children; or other behavior that in the discretion of the court warrant the appointment of a parenting coordinator.

A party can object to the involvement of a parenting coordinator if family violence is an issue. This is similar to the objection to the mediation requirement in cases involving family violence. An objection may be appropriate if one or the other parent has damaged or destroyed property or pets during an argument; has threatened to commit suicide; has pushed, slapped, kicked, punched, or physically hurt the other parent or a child; has or had problems with alcohol, drugs, or abuse of prescription drugs; has needed medication to be safe around others; has threatened not to return or has not returned the child; has used weapons to threaten or hurt people; has threatened to kill the other parent, a child ,or anyone else; has sexually abused anyone by force, threat of force, or intimidation; has been served a protective order; or has been arrested for harming or threatening to harm the other parent or anyone else, or has acted as though violent behavior toward the other parent or a child is OK in some situations. Safety-Focused Parenting plans can provide for supervised parenting time, no overnight parenting time, or other safeguards in these instances but otherwise this issue is outside the scope of this topic.

A parenting coordinator must at least hold a bachelor?s degree in counseling, education, family studies, psychology, or social work and, unless waived by the court, must complete a parenting coordinator course of at least 16 hours; OR hold a graduate degree in a mental health profession with an emphasis on family and children?s issues. He must complete at least 8 hours of family violence dynamics training provided by a family violence service provider.

A parenting coordinator can help to minimize conflict by being the neutral voice.

His authority will be specifically defined by the court in the order that appoints him, and is statutorily limited (or, more correctly, Unlimited) to such broad arenas as (1) identifying disputed issues; (2) reducing misunderstandings; (3) clarifying priorities; (4) exploring possibilities for problem solving; (5) developing methods of collaboration in parenting; (6) developing a parenting plan; and (7) complying with the court?s order regarding conservatorship or possession of and access to the child.

The parenting coordinator is paid by the parties, like a mediator, except in hardship cases. He cannot impose a solution on the parents. Nor can he testify in court. He may not be compelled to produce his own work product that he compiled during his appointment in the case. He may not be required to disclose sources of information.

A parenting coordinator can be removed on motion of one party if good cause is shown, or by agreement of both parties, or at the court?s own discretion. In his written reports to the court and to the parties will be his opinion as to whether his role is useful and should continue.

A parenting coordinator can, with court authority, suggest to or urge the parties to agree in writing to minor temporary deviations or departures from the parenting plan. But the parenting coordinator cannot himself unilaterally modify any order, judgment, or decree.

The court still has the ultimate authority to manage and control the suit and its docket; to decide child support; to decide possession of and access to the child; and, if no jury has been requested, to decide conservatorship.