Neutrality vs. Impartiality: Understanding the Core Ethical Role of Your Parenting Coordinator
We understand that navigating the language of family law and professional service contracts can be confusing, especially when emotions are high. One term that often causes misunderstanding in high-conflict family matters is the designation of the Parenting Coordinator (PC) as a “neutral third-party.”
While this term is well-intentioned—meant to convey a commitment to fairness—it is often imprecise. We believe it’s important to clarify the professional distinction between neutrality and impartiality to ensure you fully understand the commitment your PC makes to you and, most importantly, to your child.
Why "Neutral" Doesn't Quite Fit the Job
In the world of conflict resolution, neutrality suggests a complete detachment from the outcome. A truly neutral person doesn't care which solution is chosen, as long as the parties agree.
When a PC acts in a purely mediation role, facilitating communication to help parents reach their own consensus, they are certainly acting neutrally. But a Parenting Coordinator is often called upon to do something more definitive: determination (or quasi-arbitration).
In a determination, the PC must actively evaluate the facts, weigh the submissions from both sides, and make a binding decision. By making a decision, the PC is, by definition, no longer neutral about the outcome—they are legally compelled to decide and, in doing so, to favor one course of action over another.
The Standard We Uphold: Impartiality
The professional and ethical standard for third-party decision-makers in family matters is impartiality. This is the standard judges and arbitrators uphold, and it is the standard your Parenting Coordinator operates under.
Impartiality means the PC promises fairness in process, not neutrality in outcome.
When your PC is impartial, it means they are committed to three core duties:
- No Bias: The PC acts without personal preference or favoritism toward either parent.
- Equal Process: Both parties are treated equally, given a fair and equal opportunity to present all their concerns and submissions.
- Unwavering Focus: The PC remains singularly focused on one overriding objective when making a binding decision: The Child’s Best Interests.
The Child's Best Interests: Our Only Bias
The central conflict is this: your PC is impartial regarding you (the parents), but they are not neutral regarding the child.
When a PC issues a ruling, they are choosing the path that, in their professional judgment, best meets the child's needs. If one parent's proposal aligns more closely with the child's best interests, the PC is ethically and legally obligated to choose that path.
A negative determination against your submission is not evidence that the PC was biased; it is evidence that the PC was impartial in process but decisive in outcome, ruling according to their professional duty to the child.
By emphasizing the word impartiality, we seek to offer greater transparency and clarity to the public and to align our terminology with the high judicial standards required of those who make binding decisions in the lives of children. We are committed to a process that is fair, balanced, and always centered on the well-being of the children we serve.