Live With Orders Vs. Shared Lived With Order – Everything You Need To Know

What is the difference between Live with Orders and Shared Lived with Orders?

Our expert Family Law team often gets asked this question when being instructed on Children Act matters and therefore wanted to provide a brief overview of the main differences between Live with Orders and Shared Lived with Orders.

The Children and Families Act 2014 introduced several significant changes including the ‘Child Arrangement Order’ to replace orders for the previously known Residence and Contact orders. The intention for the change was to encourage parents to adopt a less rigid and confrontational perception regarding child arrangements and to take the focus away from ‘winning’ or ‘losing’. To win or lose is not the correct terminology within Children Act Proceedings.

There is a wrongful assumption that parents have a ‘right’ to a 50/50 split of time with their children. There is no legal presumption of the equal sharing of time between each parent. Section 1 of the Children Act includes a presumption that parental involvement in a child’s life will ‘further the child’s welfare’ unless there is evidence to suggest that the involvement of that parent would put the child at risk of suffering harm. The purpose of this was to create a balance between parents to ensure that one parent was not excluded from their child’s life and to emphasise that both parents have an equal status.

Live With orders

If both parties have parental responsibility a Live With Order gives very few additional rights. It does, however, give the ability to a parent (with a Live With order granted in their favour) to take their child out of the country on holiday for up to 28 days at a time without having to seek the consent of the other parent.

A Live With Order does not, however, reduce any of the rights that a parent has by virtue of having parental responsibility. Even if one parent has a Live With Order in their favour it does not give them the right to unilaterally make important decisions about the child i.e., where the child should attend school, relocating out of the country without consent, or changing the child’s surname.

Even with a Live With Order, that parent must include any other person with parental responsibility in such decisions. They have a right to be consulted and involved in all important decisions for that child. The assumption is that a Live With Order gives that parent a superior status, this is incorrect.

Shared Lived With Order

Any Order for a Shared Lived With arrangement does not have to be an equal division of time, an unequal division of time can also be reflected in a Shared Live With Order. Any Order must be in the best interests of the child.

There have been numerous examples by way of case law demonstrating the psychological benefits of a Shared Live With Order. It is a way of ensuring that one parent cannot marginalise the role the other parent plays. Often in cases of extreme parental acrimony, an Order reflecting that a child lives with both parents can signify that the parents are equal in the eyes of the law with equal responsibilities and duties. For most parents, the importance of a Shared Live With Order is the recognition that the child has two homes that are equal which ultimately means that such a decision is in the best interests of the child.