Understanding Fairness in Child Contact Arrangements
When parents separate, how the child’s time is divided between households often becomes a source of tension. One of the biggest misconceptions is that equality equals fairness, presuming that anything other than a 50/50 split is inherently unfair or diminishes one parent’s role. This view gives the wrong idea about the legal and practical concept of fairness in children’s arrangements, which is centred around the child’s welfare, not a numerical symmetry.
In this article, Zubair Dharamsi, senior family law solicitor at Rose & Rose, highlights why equal parenting time isn’t always fair.
Fairness Is Needs-Based, Not Mathematical
Determining what is fair in a contact arrangement is based on the child’s best interest. Rather than aiming for equal distribution of days or overnight stays, the focus is on stability, quality of care, and developmental appropriateness (e.g. what is suitable for a toddler may differ from what’s right for a teenager).
The Equality Trap – Why Equal Parenting Time Isn’t Always Fair
The desire for equal parental time is understandable and often stems from worthy intentions, parental validation and preservation of meaningful relationships. However, an insistence on evenness can obscure what truly matters: Whether the arrangement protects the child’s welfare.
Here are some examples of where equal time may not be in the child’s best interest:
- Availability: A parent with extensive travel obligations who cannot provide consistent care during “their half.”
- Developmental needs: An infant who is breastfeeding, whose needs differ markedly from those of an adolescent.
- Special requirements and Stability: A child with special educational needs who benefits from stability near school and therapeutic services.
- Consistency: A family in which one parent has historically been the primary caregiver, creating attachments that should not be disrupted without compelling reason.
Consider what ‘fair’ really means for children. In such circumstances, rigid adherence to equality may be detrimental. Rigidity is not fairness.
What Fairness Looks Like – Child Welfare vs. Equal Time
Some of the child-led principles that underpin fair contact arrangements in family law include:
- Child-led development: Arrangements must reflect the child’s age and stage, adapting over time; a fixed 50/50 split should not be treated as immutable.
- Valuing both parents: Different quantities of time do not equate to diminished importance. Predictable, reliable contact fosters security regardless of the number of overnights.
- Quality over quantity: Attentive, engaged time is more impactful than greater hours marked by distraction.
- Practicality and feasibility: Geography, work schedules, schooling, extracurricular commitments, sibling arrangements, and each parent’s caregiving capacity are legitimate, material considerations.
- Flexibility: Children’s needs and family circumstances evolve; arrangements should permit adjustment without recurring litigation.
The Risks of Scorekeeping – Rethinking Fairness After Separation
When separated parents fixate on equal time, such as counting minutes and dividing days, contact arrangements risk becoming transactional and a source of conflict. Holidays and special occasions can turn into contests, where time is measured not by its quality, but by its quantity. This zero-sum mindset burdens parents and harms children, who don’t count minutes, they feel safety, love, and whether they’re protected from parental conflict.
When Equal Time Works
Equal-time arrangements are not inherently problematic. They can be highly effective where:
- Parents live in close proximity,
- Work patterns permit responsive caregiving,
- Communication and cooperation are strong, and
- Children can transition between homes without distress.
Crucially, equal time should be adopted because it serves the particular family’s circumstances, not as a default metric of fairness.
Redefining What Fair Really Means
Instead of asking “Is this equal?”, try asking:
- Is this arrangement working for our child’s current developmental and emotional needs?
- Can both of us provide consistent, loving, high-quality care when it’s our time?
- Does this arrangement help reduce conflict and facilitate more amicable co-parenting?
- Is our child thriving, emotionally, socially, and at school?
- Can we both maintain strong, meaningful relationships with them?
If the answers feel like a “yes”, then the arrangement is fair, whether it is 50/50, 60/40, 70/30, or something else entirely.
Path Forward
For parents, releasing the equality myth can be liberating. It enables creative, child-focused solutions and affirms that both parents matter, even if their roles differ. For professionals, it is essential to challenge the presumption that equal time is the gold standard; children merit arrangements tailored to their needs, not to parental scorekeeping. For children, fairness is experienced as two parents prioritising their wellbeing, fostering a life that is secure, loving, and as stable and routine as possible under the circumstances.
Sometimes, fairness may mean something other than a 50/50 split, and unequal arrangements can be precisely what is right for the child.
About Zubair Dharamsi – Author Bio
Zubair Dharamsi is a senior solicitor at Rose & Rose Solicitors, with extensive experience in family law and child contact arrangements. As a Resolution member, he is committed to constructive, child-focused solutions that prioritise wellbeing over conflict.
