shared parental responsibility is usually the first thing mentioned on consent orders. In high conflict cases orders might say shared paretal responsibility is limited to X Y Z and the mother (for example) has sole parental responsibility for education / health or what ever.
My advice - quit trying to make an illogical person see logic.
Can you give us a rough ball park about what the other parent thinks shared parental responsibility refers too so we can give better advice?
So for example - Having spent $$$ getting consent orders so I can see my kids, my ex decided the term 'or by agreement' to mean that if she no longer agreed with the orders she didn't have to comply WTF... So I do feel your pain.
The order says:
The Mother have sole parental responsibility for the children, PROVIDED ALWAYS THAT the Mother keep the Father informed of significant long term decisions that she makes in relation to the children and actively seeks the Father's input on such issues.
And then says:
For the purpose of order X hereof:-
(a) before any such long term decisions are made in respect of the child:-
It goes on to describe a method of making the proposal, the Father’s mechanisms to respond and provide his view.
Upon receipt of the Father’s view, Mother considers these and make a final decision of the outcome immediately after making the decision.
It also says that if the Father does not respond within the prescribed timeframe, the Mother shall be entitled to presume that the Father does not want to be involved and she may decide the issue
The orders state that the Parents agree to children attending XYZ Catholic School until specified date.
Nowhere in the consent orders are the words ‘limited to’. The Father has written to the Mother saying that the orders give her Sole Parental limited to Education and Religion as they’ve agreed to the Catholic school.
He now wants to apply to court to change the orders he consented to (less than 1.5 years after signing these)
I’m paraphrasing the orders just in case this gets found.