Statutory Foundation

Section 15(2) of the Family Law Act limits Parenting Coordination to the implementation of existing agreements and orders. Parenting Coordination is therefore not a source of new parenting authority. It is a structured mechanism for implementing existing parenting arrangements.

Section 6(4)(a)(ix) of the Family Law Act Regulation permits determinations regarding implementation matters agreed upon by the parties and the Parenting Coordinator, provided the authority remains within the statutory framework.

Parenting Coordination operates because the Court remains available to exercise powers that cannot be delegated. Parenting Coordinators do not enforce orders, make family violence findings, exercise coercive authority, or substantially vary parenting arrangements. Those matters remain within the Court's jurisdiction.

Judicial Oversight Remains Essential

Parenting Coordination is a delegated process operating within continuing judicial oversight. Parenting Coordinators possess no enforcement powers. They do not make family violence findings, impose coercive remedies, substantially vary parenting arrangements, or exercise powers reserved to the Court.

Matters requiring enforcement, family violence findings, credibility determinations, substantial factual findings, major restructuring of parenting arrangements, or coercive authority are returned to Court. The Court remains the ultimate supervisory body.

Parenting Coordination reduces the number of disputes requiring litigation, but it does not replace judicial oversight.

Funding the Process

Adequate funding is necessary for Parenting Coordination to function as an effective delegated process. Without available retainers, consultation, facilitation, recommendations, and determinations cannot occur, and matters inevitably return to court unresolved.

Retainers are generally:

• shared equally unless otherwise specified;
• maintained throughout the appointment; and
• structured to preserve sufficient funds for determination work if required.

Where authorized, the Parenting Coordinator may reapportion fees if one party's conduct has unreasonably increased the time and cost required to manage implementation issues.

Optional Authority to Address Unworkable Parenting Schedules

Parenting plans may remain fundamentally appropriate while aspects of their operation become unworkable because of a child's development, school schedules, transportation issues, extracurricular activities, or changing parental circumstances. Where expressly authorized, the Parenting Coordinator may make implementation-focused adjustments to scheduling, sequencing, timing, transitions, rotations, communication, or contact arrangements when necessary to keep an existing parenting arrangement workable. This authority does not permit the Parenting Coordinator to alter the underlying parenting structure, substantially change the overall allocation of parenting time or contact, or create a fundamentally different parenting arrangement. It is intended to permit practical implementation of the existing Parenting Plan where circumstances have changed but the essential parenting arrangement remains intact.

Terms of a Model Parenting Coordination Order

The following clauses may be adapted for inclusion in a court order appointing the Parenting Coordinator.

Appointment

1. Pursuant to s. 15 of the Family Law Act (FLA), the parties will forthwith retain Cori L. McGuire of Cori L. McGuire Law Corporation, a member in good standing of the Roster of the British Columbia Parenting Coordinators Roster Society (the ”Society”), as parenting coordinator (the “Parenting Coordinator”), for a minimum term of twenty four (24) months, on the terms provided in this Order and in the most current form of generally accepted precedent for a parenting coordination agreement endorsed by the Society (the “Standard PC Agreement”); provided that where terms of this Order conflict with the Standard PC Agreement, this Order will prevail.

Parenting Plan

2. The Parties' parenting arrangements respecting the Child(ren) are set out in the following Orders and Agreements:

[insert all operating parenting arrangement orders and agreements by date and judge name]

(together referred to as the “Parenting Plan”).

Completion of Appointment

3.  The parties will complete the appointment of the Parenting Coordinator, including:

a.       execution of the Standard PC Agreement of the BC PC Roster Society, and
b.       remittance of all retainers and deposits on or before [Date], with liberty to apply to the Court failing the conclusion of the appointment of the Parenting Coordinator unless otherwise agreed to in writing.

Scope of Authority

4.       The Parenting Coordinator may assist the parties in the interpretation and implementation of the Parenting Plan in the following manner:

a.   by building consensus between the parties, including, but not limited to:                                                             

 i.      developing and instituting guidelines for the implementation of the parenting terms of this Order;                                                          

 ii.      developing and instituting guidelines for communications between the parties;                                                          

 iii.      identifying, creating and implementing strategies for resolving conflicts between the parties;                                                           

 iv.      providing information respecting resources available to the parties for the improvement of their communication or parenting skills; and                                                        

v.      other issues outstanding between the parties that they subsequently agree are in the best interest of the child(ren) to resolve by consensus;

b.   by communicating with, obtaining information from, and providing information to relevant third parties involved with the child(ren), including but not limited to educators, medical professionals, counsellors, and childcare providers;

c.   by recommending or facilitating counselling or therapeutic supports where necessary to assist with the implementation of the Parenting Plan, and not for treatment, diagnosis, or broader therapeutic intervention unless otherwise ordered by the court;

d.  by meeting with or interviewing the child(ren) directly, in a manner and at times determined by the Parenting Coordinator to be appropriate, having regard to the child(ren)’s age, maturity, and circumstances;

e.       by issuing non-binding Recommendations to the Parties that the Parenting Coordinator believes would be in the best interest of the Child(ren); and

f.    Subject to the specific provisions of the Authorizing Instruments and this Agreement, pursuant to s. 18 of the FLA, and in the event the parties cannot agree on any matter respecting the exercise of their parenting responsibilities as defined in s. 41, by making a determination on such matters subject to s. 19; without limiting paragraph 4(f), and as additional implementation matters agreed upon by the Parties and the Parenting Coordinator, by making determinations respecting:

i.  subject always to s. 6(4)(b) of the Family Law Act Regulation, the practical implementation of existing parenting time and contact arrangements, including, despite a specific time, exchange time, or other scheduling detail set out in an Authorizing Instrument, reasonable adjustments to start and end times, exchanges, transitions, transportation, rotations, and other scheduling details required to accommodate the children’s schedules, school, activities, the Parents’ work schedules, travel, or other practical circumstances, provided that the determination implements and does not substantially change the existing parenting time or contact arrangement;

ii.  procedures reasonably necessary to administer the Parenting Plan and the Parenting Coordination process, including communication and consultation protocols, the manner in which issues are raised and responded to, information exchange, submissions, response timelines, sequencing or deferral of issues, and when consultation is complete and an unresolved matter proceeds to determination. Determinations under this paragraph regulate the Parenting Coordination and implementation process only and do not constitute freestanding orders regulating either Parent's general conduct.

iii. reapportioning responsibility between the Parents for the Parenting Coordinator's fees, disbursements and other charges, including where a Parent's use of the Parenting Coordination process has resulted in identifiable additional fees or expenses; and

iv. reimbursement where one Parent pays all or part of a retainer, account, or other required Parenting Coordination funding attributable to the other Parent in order to permit Parenting Coordination services to continue, including determining the amount payable to the Parent who advanced those funds. The Parenting Coordinator has no responsibility or authority for collection or enforcement of that reimbursement.

[v. Optional]   Determinations where child support incomes and proportions are already fixed by order or agreement, respecting whether a claimed expense qualifies as as a special or extraordinary expense within the meaning of the Child Support Guidelines and how such expense is to be shared without varying income findings, proportions or support orders.]

Fees

5.       The fees, disbursements and other charges of the Parenting Coordinator, inclusive of the retainers to be held throughout the term, shall be paid to the Parenting Coordinator by the parties in [add term such as equal portions], subject to the Parenting Coordinator’s authority to reapportion the total parenting coordination costs between the parties as provided in the Standard PC Agreement. Either party is at liberty to apply to the Court to resolve any issue arising out of the other party’s non-payment of the fees, disbursements and other charges of the Parenting Coordinator.

Referral of Disputes

6.       Subject to s.6(4)(b) of the Family Law Regulation, and any applicable Order of the Court, if the parents are unable to agree on any decision affecting the parenting responsibilities or parenting arrangements for the Child(ren), they will refer the dispute to the Parenting Coordinator for resolution. The parties will not initiate or renew court proceedings on matters which are within the scope of the Parenting Coordinator’s services.

Non-Compliance

7.       Either party is at liberty to apply to the Court if either party fails to comply with the Determinations of the Parenting Coordinator.

Review of Determinations

8.       Either party may ask the Court under s. 19 of FLA to review a Determination of the Parenting Coordinator at his or her own expense.

9.     For certainty, nothing in this Order limits the Court's continuing supervisory jurisdiction. The Parenting Coordinator's authority is delegated and implementation-focused. Issues requiring enforcement, coercive relief, findings of family violence, significant credibility assessments, variation of substantive parenting arrangements, or matters otherwise beyond the Parenting Coordinator's delegated authority may be brought before the Court.

Why This Model Works

The model is intentionally conservative. The Parenting Coordinator implements existing parenting arrangements rather than redesigning them. Authority remains delegated and limited. Determinations remain reviewable under s. 19 of the Family Law Act. Matters requiring judicial powers remain before the Court.

The result is a structured process that resolves many implementation disputes without repeated litigation while preserving judicial oversight where it is needed.

Proportional Process Selection

Parenting Coordination does not require the same intervention for every dispute. The process may be conducted through written submissions, telephone discussions, shuttle facilitation, joint conferences, recommendations or determinations, depending upon the nature and urgency of the issue, the parents' capacity to participate productively, cost and proportionality, and any relevant safety considerations. Joint conferences are not treated as a procedural prerequisite to determination.