How to Undermine Your Own 50/50 Shared Care Application

Book a Free 30 min chat with Phil Kedge: www.contactphil...
All my blogs: www.mckenziefr...
Family Court Training: www.familycourt...
The McKenzie Friend UK Network: www.mckenziefr...
Director Philip Kedge
Retired Police Chief Inspector
McKenzie Friend since 2012
How to undermine your own 50/50 Shared Care application
So, how do parents undermine their 50/50 shared care application?
The non-resident parent submits their c100 application, the other parent responds alleging all kinds of horrible things about them including their poor parenting, low moral standards, narcissistic, controlling and sociopathic behaviour.
Now, there are of course cases involving allegations of serious domestic abuse that requires safeguarding measures to be put in place by the court. In these cases, the chances of equal shared care is likely to be out of the question. Please be clear, I am not talking about cases of abuse that require safeguarding, and I am not minimising domestic abuse.
I am talking about the mudslinging allegations that are only intended to drive hate, acrimony and conflict. Sadly these type of behaviours are common place within the family courts and from what I often see are disgracefully fuelled by lawyers for what I believe is financial gain.
So, the applicant is seeking equal shared care, and they start thinking something along the lines of this:
‘I want shared care, the other side is slinging mud, so to show that I can get shared care I have to sling mud back. Because we are both slinging mud, then that makes us even and the courts will determine that shared care is fair and the best option.’
What happens next is that Cafcass speaks to the applicant, who uses this opportunity to denigrate the resident parent, to criticise their parenting and trying to convince Cafcass that they are the better parent.
Let’s take a pause here, because it never fails to amaze me, how often, otherwise articulate and intelligent people suddenly resort to this immature and sensless way of thinking. Parents who may in life hold responsible positions, suddenly regress to the mental thinking of a school child, fighting in the play-ground.
Cafcass, on listening to the applicant defending themselves against the mudslinging and then throwing the mud back, will no doubt be rolling back their eyes having to engage with yet another parent who is irresponsibly going to war with their ex, and only wants to place the child in the middle of that war zone. The chances of 50/50 shared care has now been significantly reduced at the very first encounter with Cafcass.
Let me perhaps explain the reality. The family court is not a competition of parenting, the standard of parenting is to be good enough, which in its simplest terms means can a parent meet the basic needs of a child.
Think about it logically as I provide you with two suggestions to consider.
A parent is seeking 50/50 shared care.
Is a Cafcass officer more likely to consider that equal shared care may be in the best interests of the child if Option 1) They throw allegations, demonise the resident parent and belittle their parenting or Option 2) Inform Cafcass that they want t draw the line under the past and move forward to build positive co-parenting?
Which option have you chosen?
Why is it that when speaking to Cafcass, the first thing parents want to do is to take chunks out of each other? It’s almost a primeval instinct to both defend and attack where all signs of emotional intelligence evaporates
Let me now tell you the alternative a path, the path of #lightnothate, the path of engaging brain.
I suggest that the very first statement to make to Cafcass should be as follows: ‘Dear Cafcass Officer, I have made an application for 50/50 shared care, could you as the professional please advise me, what is the best path I need to follow to increase the chances of that happening? -
Genius!
Let me invite you into another secret.
At the McKenzie Friend UK Network, people contact us everyday seeking help. People phone up for advice, but instead of asking for advise they spend most of their time demonising their ex and going through a chronology of everything that they believe will support their case, at which point, even I may start to lose the will to live.
In over a decade, I cannot recall someone phoning me and simply asking, ‘Phil I need your advice, what’s the best path for 50/50 shared care?
If someone actually did that, I think I would fall off my chair in amazement.
Any Cafcass Officer will tell you, that 50/50 shared care is only generally considered appropriate when the non-resident parent shows themselves to be a responsible parent who can demonstrate that they truly understand the best interests of the child. Going to war with your ex is likely to put a very large nail in your own coffin.
Let’s leave it here, I think I have made the point.

[@hiaslayer]

who is the non resident parent? The one that misses grabbing the child, buggering off and making allegations? This is a serious question. I like your videos and wished I would have found them a year ago.

[@mckenziefrienduknetwork]

Thank you, I wish you had as well. So many people say that which is why spreading the word and sharing them is important. Thank you for your comments.

[@Mrskess]

Phil, I lost residency because of my parenting. I still don’t know why my barrister didn’t challenge that my parenting was good enough. My son had additional /special educational needs and was going though assessments for EHCP ( educational healthcare plan ) and my barrister he asked to wait until those reports are ready, which would take only 2 about weeks. Those reports has positive comments about my parenting. Reports before SS got involved had positive comments about my parenting. Only when SS got involved then My s7 was very against me and negative about my parenting, but I had various other reports that my parenting was very good. I don’t think my mental health played a role as I was discharged from MH service and not even had any intervention or therapy by Mh, didn’t prevent contact, didn’t let abuse in the marriage and post to make contact difficult for children and father. I had some much unjust and untrue allegations from other 3 organisations . But I know my cases was predetermined, and there was nothing I couldn’t have done to change age the outcome. It was a set up. You might Sao that this is nonsense, but it’s true I have some information that indicates something was going on behind the scenes. I don’t think it includes the judge but definitely all the others.’

[@mandeepsahota5209]

Well said

[@Ishence]

It is understandable to be framed by Cafcass. Their interviews are framed by very little knowledge about what they deal with, by what the courts ask them to do, by the hostile parent and by an absence of critical thinking. So yes, lie, don't tell everyone involved that the behaviours are not abusive. Why? Because the courts, cafcass and everyone involved can't help a parent who can't relate to his/her behaviours.

[@shellquinn3673]

I haven’t had a chance to listen to your other videos, I do intend to. Please excuse me, if this my points raised has been covered in another video. I felt it necessary to put a comment to this video as in my opinion these are strong opinions. It would be good to know if Mc Kenzie friend has worked with disabled parents who have no access to reasonable adjustments within the family court and no access to legal aid? In addition to, parents who have experienced coercive control using the child arrangements orders but there is no law to protect against this abuse and the current DA / CC laws are at such a high threshold and do not consider the issue raised. It would be interesting to know if your opinions have been considered, after working with the above people or agencies representing these individuals. I would welcome a conversation to gain further understanding on your opinion, which in my opinion is bias and unfair. It actually represents current issues and failures within the family court and legal system today. Feel free to contact me directly to provide me with further understanding.