There is no right or wrong way for a court to use Talking Parents. The language below is purely for example purposes. You are welcome to use it verbatim or copy and paste, but feel free to create your own unique orders to suit your specific needs.
Mandatory and exclusive use of Talking Parents may be necessary for cases involving parents who keep coming back to court because they simply cannot communicate effectively. Such use could be incorporated into just about any order of the court regarding a divorce, paternity, or other child-custody related action. For example:
The Court, finding that both parties have adequate access to the internet for said purposes, orders the following:
Due to ineffective, vitriolic, or otherwise poor communication between the parties, the Court orders both parties to go to www.TalkingParents.com and create an account within ___ days of this order.
Communication between the parties will be limited to matters regarding their child(ren) and will be made only through the Talking Parents service. Any communication or attempted communication by either party, or by a third party at either party’s request, outside of Talking Parents will be contemptible and may result in sanctions including but not limited to incarceration.
The only exception to this condition would be in the event of a medical emergency regarding the child(ren) in which case either party may contact the other via other means to notify them of such an emergency. Any agreements reached regarding the child(ren) as a result of such emergency-related communication must be clarified, verified, and documented through Talking Parents in a timely manner.
If the parties are already using the Talking Parents service then they will continue to do so pursuant to the terms above.
The Court may also want to limit what evidence will be admissible in future proceedings. For example:
In all future court proceedings related to the shared-parenting agreement, the only admissible evidence regarding communication between the parties will be limited to the record maintained by Talking Parents.
The only situation where other evidence of communication between the parties will be admissible is when the evidence relates directly to a medical emergency and the communications regarding that emergency.
When parents get along well enough to discuss matters on their own, or even when parents get along great, it is still a good idea for them to keep a permanent log of all important decisions and disputes regarding their child(ren). Talking Parents can be utilized from the very beginning to hopefully keep parents from coming back to court as often and to make whatever litigation does occur a little more efficient. In these situations courts can simply recommend Talking Parents, or the Court can require parents to use it on a limited basis, for example:
The Court, finding that both parties have adequate access to the internet for said purposes, orders the following:
In the interest of promoting effective and efficient communication between the parties, and in the interest of maintaining a good record of all decisions regarding the parties’ child(ren), the Court orders both parents to go to www.Talking Parents and create an account within ___ days of this order.
While the Court places no restrictions on how, when, or where the parties may communicate with each other, the Court does require both parties to clarify, verify, and document all important decisions regarding their child(ren) through the Talking Parents service.
To make such an order more meaningful, the Court may consider adding a provision such as this:
In the event of a disagreement between the parties related to a decision regarding their child(ren), the burden will be on the moving or petitioning party to show that the decision in question was documented through the Talking Parents service in a timely manner after it was discussed by the parties. If the matter was not documented through the Talking Parents service in a timely manner, then, absent exigent or extraordinary circumstances, the moving or petitioning party will be barred from making any claim or seeking any relief related to the undocumented issue.
For example: If Party A and Party B agree on their own that Child will learn to play the guitar and that the parties will split the cost of the instrument and lessons equally, then it will be incumbent on both parties to document said decision through Talking Parents.
If Party A then purchases the instrument and lessons, and provides notice to Party B for reimbursement for half of the expenses, but Party B refuses to pay and claims that they did not have an agreement, then Party A will only be able to seek relief in court if the details of the agreement were documented through Talking Parents in a timely manner after the agreement was reached, thus giving Party B an opportunity to clarify their position.
The purpose of this provision is to encourage effective communication between the parties and to avoid future litigation. A further purpose is to make any litigation that does occur more efficient.
If the parties are already using the Talking Parents service then they will continue to do so pursuant to the terms above.