When One Parent Takes the Lead: Lessons from Spaulding v. Spaulding

The Florida courts generally lean toward shared responsibility when it comes to custody cases. There is a generally held belief that both parents should remain in the child’s life. But that ideal doesn’t always work out in real life. When the situation is marked by high conflict, neglect, or a level of instability that makes co-parenting unsafe or unworkable, the Florida courts have the authority to break from the norm.

The case of Spaulding v. Spaulding shows how and when a judge can make that call. When shared responsibility would actually put the child at risk, the court can step in and grant sole parental responsibility to one parent. The court takes these matters seriously. It must believe that preventing one parent access to the child is in the child’s best interests.

Background of the case 

The Spaulding case came out of a long and bitter divorce, the kind where every decision seemed to lead to another dispute. The parents shared one minor child, and after years of court battles, it became clear that their ability to co-parent had broken down entirely.

There was evidence of constant arguing, including medical decisions, school choices, and weekend activities. Neither parent seemed willing to bend, and the child was often caught in the crossfire. Accusations flew in both directions. Each claimed the other was manipulating the child and ignoring court orders.

After reviewing testimony and documents, the trial judge reached a hard but necessary conclusion: the level of conflict and mistrust between the parents had made shared decision-making impossible. The fight wasn’t just between two adults anymore. It was actually harming the child.

To protect the child’s well-being, the court awarded the mother sole parental responsibility. She became the primary residential parent. The father was still given time-sharing, but he was removed from joint decision-making.

The appeal

In this case, the father appealed the judgment of the court, arguing that the trial court had skipped a key legal step. Under Florida law, a judge cannot award sole parental responsibility without first making a specific finding that shared responsibility isn’t in the best interests of the child. The father pointed out that the court’s written order didn’t include that language. He claimed that made the ruling legally defective.

The First District Court of Appeal didn’t see the father’s way. It ultimately upheld the decision to deprive him of the authority to make decisions on the child’s behalf. The reasoning was clear: even though the ruling didn’t use the exact phrasing referred to by the father, the message was unmistakable. Coparenting would hurt the child.

Talk to a Clearwater, FL, Child Custody Lawyer Today 

Cairns Law, P.A., represents the interests of parents during custody hearings. Call our Clearwater family lawyers today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin discussing your next steps right away.

Source:

caselaw.findlaw.com/court/fl-district-court-of-appeal/2142160.html