QLD What difference does "living with and spending time with" in shared custody

[Dad 2 + 1]

I'm moving toward a Final Hearing over a shared care arrangement and am unclear on what difference "Living with X and spend time with Y" makes?

I'd like to understand this so I know if I should be pushing for the Children to live with me and spend time with their mother - or not make it an issue.

Thanks for your advice.

 

[Atticus]

The 'live with' parent is regarded in most cases to be the one with majority care that provides the 'home' for the child, whilst the child 'spends time with' the other parent...

Not sure it has any connotations in actual practice, however it MAY with regards to the CSA and Child support.

If you are wanting to make orders for equal shared care, it should probably be worded .. Child x lives with parent A for whatever time, and lives with parent B for whatever time

 

[Dad 2 + 1]

Thanks for the response.

We are currently sharing care (as calculated by the CSA) at a ration of 62/38 with me being the 38% BUT it's a very beneficial arrangement at the moment.

My ex is wanting to change it, and it's a little complicated but by my advice (and even a suggestion by the judge) would indicate that the proportion of care could move to 51/49. I was more concerned about any limitations I may have with the children if it they "Lived with their mother and spent time with me").

I suspect now this may relate more to CSA or government payments my ex m might be receiving. I don't qualify for any government payments.

 

[Atticus]

Yes. No limitations between the 2 in family law AFAIK, assuming you also have equal shared parental responsibility.

I know the CSA terminology around care changes to shared at 35% and over and I *think* also affects govt payments but by how and by how much I don't know. A call to centrelink may help, if you can get through that is LOL

 

[Tremaine]

In our situation, the child ‘lives with’ mum and spends time with dad, but we have equal care - 49% with dad, 51% with mum according to CSA. The ‘live with’ component doesn’t have any practical consequences except for maybe school catchment areas.

 

[sammy01]

It is just a term. I don't know how the courts write it when it is absolutely 50/50.
CSA and centrelink use differen terms.

More than 65% makes you the primary carer. So when I had 35% care - and the ex had 65% then it was considered 'shared care' for the purposes of working out family tax benefit entitlements.

Look they're just terms. The most important one is 'shared parental responsibility' and that us assumed to exist in all family law cases - unless a judge deems it should not exist. AND shared parental responsibility means both parents are equal when it comes to choosing school, even if 1 parent only zero time with the kid....