Posted by Nydia Streets of Streets Law in Florida Child Custody

Can a Florida family law court force parents to communicate via platforms such as Our Family Wizard? This was one of the issues brought up in the appellate case Scudder v. Scudder, 4D19-2288 (Fla. 4th DCA May 6, 2020) in which the former husband appealed several child custody-related issues.

The parties were married in India and were living in the United Arab Emirates when they entered a marital settlement agreement and parenting plan which gave primary time-sharing to the former husband. The former husband filed for divorce in Florida, filing the agreements and requesting that they be ratified. Ultimately, the parties were divorced in one county and the child custody proceedings went forward in a different county. After a social investigator was appointed, the trial court awarded the former wife primary residential care of the children and permitted her to relocate to New York. The former husband appealed several issues.

In pertinent part, the appellate court addressed travel costs to effectuate time-sharing and the use of Our Family Wizard. With regard to travel costs, the appellate court held it was error for the trial court to fail to consider and apportion this expense between the parties. The appellate court held “The court did not specify how the parents will share the travel costs. The judgment essentially burdens the former husband with the expenses for travel of less than four days’ duration. [. . .] The circuit court’s finding that the parties each have the financial ability to share the children’s travel expenses is based on the social investigator’s report. The court did not receive any other testimony on the parties’ current financial positions. Indeed, the court reserved jurisdiction to do just that. To the extent the parties need to know precisely how the travel expenses will be shared, the former wife agrees the case should be remanded for clarification on this issue. We therefore reverse and remand on this issue.”

Regarding the use of Our Family Wizard, the former husband argued neither party requested the use of this program, and their original parenting plan stated they agreed to communicate via text and email. The former wife argued this issue was moot because the parties agreed to use the program after the final judgment was entered. However, the former husband asserted he did not agree and only signed up for the program to comply with the final judgment when his motion for stay was denied. The appellate court agreed with the former husband and held “Section 61.13(2)(b) requires the court to ‘describe in adequate detail the methods and technologies that the parents will use to communicate with the child[ren].’ It does not however dictate the methods and technologies that can be used when the parents communicate with each other, and neither parent requested a specific means of communication. Because this detail was not requested by either party, the provision limiting communication to Talking Parents, Family Wizard, or a similar app should be stricken.”

The use of communication programs to encourage co-parenting between parents can be beneficial. If you have questions about how these programs may apply to your Florida family law case, contact a Miami child custody lawyer for a consultation.