In a Florida divorce proceeding, shared parental responsibility for a child is preferred unless it is contrary to the child’s best interests. On this point, Fla. Stat. § 61.13(2)(c)(2) provides:
In ordering shared parental responsibility, the court may consider the expressed desires of the parents and may grant to one party the ultimate responsibility over specific aspects of the child’s welfare or may divide those responsibilities between the parties based on the best interests of the child. Areas of responsibility may include education, health care, and any other responsibilities that the court finds unique to a particular family.
Courts prefer shared parental responsibility as it allows both parents to continue to make joint decisions affecting a child without regard for which parent provides the child’s primary physical residence. Kuharcik v. Kuharcik, 629 So. 2d 224 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), citing Markham v. Markham, 485 So. 2d 1299, 1300 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). In Kuharick, the Fourth District reversed a trial court order that required that the “[p]arents are to consult each other on long range decisions, and if no agreement can be reached, the primary residential parent will decide.” Id. at 225. The Fourth District reversed because the trial court “failed to delineate [the] specific aspects of the child’s welfare [over which the] wife should have ultimate responsibility.” Instead, the trial court was directed to determine “which specific aspects of the child’s welfare [the wife] should have ultimate responsibility over.” Id.
Florida’s parenting and time sharing statute provides a nonexclusive list of factors the court should consider in establishing parental responsibility. See Fla. Stat. § 61.13(a)-(t); see also, Fazzaro v. Fazzaro, No. 2D11-5714 (Fla. 2d DCA Mar. 8, 2013). In considering the factors under this section, courts are not required to make specific findings other than deciding the ultimate issue of the child’s best interests. Id. at *1, citing Bader v. Bader, 639 So. 2d 122, 124-25 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)(en banc).
In Fazzaro, the Second District reversed the trial court as the lower court made no oral or written findings on the factors regarding parental responsibility. Id. at *1. In reviewing the record below, the trial court found “no logic or justification for the final judgment’s provision granting one party ultimate responsibility over all decisions affecting the child should the parties be unable to agree.” Id.
——————————-
Below are additional posts on Florida divorce law:
What are Florida’s Residency Requirements for a Divorce?
Temporary Alimony in Florida (Part 1): Maintaining a Standard of Living.
Understanding Equitable Distribution in a Florida Divorce.