28 May Equal Timesharing in Florida: What Parents Must Know
Equal timesharing law Florida has reshaped how parenting plans are determined in court. Florida’s 2023 amendment to Florida Statute § 61.13(2)(c)2 introduces a rebuttable presumption that equal timesharing is in the best interest of the child. This pivotal shift impacts parenting rights and responsibilities for families across the state, including those in Miami.
Understanding Florida Statute § 61.13(2)(c)2
As of July 1, 2023, Florida law presumes that equal timesharing is in the child’s best interest, unless rebutted by a preponderance of the evidence. Consequently, this presumption applies in the absence of an agreement by the parents and reflects the public policy favoring frequent and continuing contact with both parents after separation or divorce.
This amendment shifts the legal baseline. Previously, courts had to start from a neutral stance, without favoring any particular timesharing arrangement. Now, equal timesharing is the starting point, making it essential for parents to understand their rights and obligations.
What Does Equal Timesharing Mean?
Equal timesharing means that each parent will have custody of the child for approximately 50% of the time. Generally, this is implemented through a detailed Parenting Plan that sets out specific days, holidays, and overnight arrangements.
Key Considerations in a Parenting Plan
- Weekly schedules
- Holiday and vacation allocations
- Transportation arrangements
- Decision-making responsibilities
According to Fla. Stat. § 61.13(2)(c)2, courts must approve all parenting plans and ensure they serve the child’s best interests. Therefore, a thorough and practical plan is essential.
Rebutting the Equal Timesharing Presumption
Although the statute favors equal timesharing, it is a rebuttable presumption. In other words, a parent may present evidence demonstrating that equal timesharing is not in the child’s best interest. This requires a showing by a preponderance of the evidence, such as:
- History of domestic violence or abuse
- Substance abuse or neglect by a parent
- Parental alienation or inability to co-parent effectively
- Significant logistical or geographic challenges
To make this determination, the court must consider the factors listed under Fla. Stat. § 61.13(3). These include the moral fitness, mental and physical health, and home environment of each parent.
Judicial Discretion and Written Findings
Courts still retain discretion to deviate from equal timesharing if warranted. However, they are now required to make specific written findings of fact when establishing or modifying a timesharing schedule that does not involve equal timesharing, unless the parents have agreed otherwise. As a result, this provision ensures transparency and accountability in family court decisions.
Case Law Interpreting the 2023 Amendment
The amendment is still relatively new, but it builds on earlier Florida appellate decisions such as Ruffridge v. Ruffridge and Wilking v. Reiford, which disfavored rotating custody. Accordingly, the change overturns this judicial disfavor and codifies legislative intent to support co-parenting and shared responsibilities.
Additionally, courts have emphasized that best interest determinations remain paramount. For instance, in Ward v. Waters, 2024 WL 24793 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024), the appellate court reversed a long-distance parenting plan despite a presumption of equal contact, highlighting the continuing role of detailed findings.
Practical Advice for Parents
Parents seeking custody arrangements should prepare for the presumption of equal timesharing. Therefore, it is critical to present clear, compelling evidence and collaborate in developing a comprehensive parenting plan. To be proactive, parents should also consider the following steps:
- Document parenting efforts and involvement consistently
- Demonstrate flexibility and co-parenting ability
- Consult with a family law attorney experienced in Florida custody law
In high-conflict cases or where abuse is alleged, it may be necessary to retain expert witnesses or seek psychological evaluations to support a deviation from equal timesharing. Ultimately, preparation and evidence will guide the court’s decision.
Implications for Modifying Existing Orders
This statutory change can be grounds for modification of a prior parenting plan. Under Fla. Stat. § 61.13(2)(c), a substantial and material change in circumstances is required to modify an existing order. In many cases, courts may now consider the presumption itself as a change, particularly if one parent relocates within 50 miles of the other or if the original order did not contemplate equal timesharing.
Conclusion
The 2023 amendment to Florida Statute § 61.13(2)(c)2 significantly changes the legal landscape of child custody in Florida. Therefore, parents in Miami and throughout the state must understand the presumption in favor of equal timesharing and prepare to meet the statutory requirements. Whether you are negotiating a new parenting plan or seeking to modify an existing one, working with an experienced Florida family law attorney is essential to protecting your parental rights and ensuring the best interests of your children.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Does equal timesharing mean exactly 50/50 custody?
Not necessarily. Equal timesharing means both parents have roughly the same amount of time with the child, but the schedule may vary based on logistics and the child’s needs.
Can the presumption of equal timesharing be challenged?
Yes. A parent can rebut the presumption with evidence showing that equal timesharing is not in the child’s best interest.
What if the parents agree to a different schedule?
If both parents agree on a timesharing plan and the court finds it in the child’s best interest, the court can approve it even if it’s not equal.
Is the new law retroactive?
The statute applies to all new cases filed after July 1, 2023. It may also be considered in modification cases where a substantial change in circumstances is established.
Can one parent move and still have equal timesharing?
Relocation may affect equal timesharing. Courts will consider the impact on the child and the feasibility of maintaining frequent contact with both parents.