The eleven clauses

Documentation Index

Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://help.rytz.com.au/llms.txt

Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

The 11 mandatory clauses (plus 2 conditional overlays) cover the full operating manual a parenting plan needs. This page walks through each one — what it does, the law behind it, and the practical things to focus on while you’re drafting.

​

1. Parental responsibility

What it covers: who decides the major long-term issues for the children — health, education, religion, name, and relocation. Legal framing: Section 61DA of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) was substantially amended in 2024. The presumption of equal shared parental responsibility was repealed. The court now decides parental responsibility on the best-interests test (s60CA), so the plan must specify what was actually agreed. Three structural choices:

• Joint — both parents share responsibility for major decisions
• Sole (User / Other) — one parent has final say
• Mixed — joint for some matters, sole for others

The editor also captures day-to-day decisions (the parent caring for the children at the time, no consultation needed) and non-major matters requiring consultation (extracurriculars, sleepovers, vaccinations, with a notice period for each).

​

2. Live with / spend time with

What it covers: the schedule the children can rely on — where they live, when, and how they move between households. Legal framing: Australian terminology is “live with” and “spend time with” — never “custody” or “access”. The plan needs concrete dates and times, not phrases like “reasonable contact”. Vague language is the most-cited reason orders fail in practice. Structural fields:

• Primary residence designation — User / Other / shared (equal or unequal)
• Routine schedule — Week A pattern, optionally alternating with Week B
• Christmas / January block — the most-disputed clause every year
• School holidays generally — alternating, halved, or as routine

The structured calendar editor handles the visual layout and produces auto-rendered text that personalises with the parties’ names (“Monday-Friday with Sarah, Saturday-Sunday with James”).

​

3. Communication

What it covers: how the children stay in touch with the parent they’re not currently with — and how the parents communicate with each other. Legal framing: The s60CC framework recognises a child’s right to a meaningful relationship with both parents (where it is safe to do so). A plan that names the channel, frequency, and a non-disparagement undertaking holds up far better than one that says “reasonable phone contact”. Structural fields:

• Channels — phone / video / SMS / email / co-parenting platform (any combination)
• Frequency per week — concrete number, not “as agreed”
• Initiator — either parent / parent currently with the children / non-resident parent
• Non-disparagement undertaking — toggle for the standard “neither parent will speak negatively about the other party in the children’s presence” clause

​

4. Changeover

What it covers: where, when, and how the children move between households at the start and end of each period. Legal framing: Changeover is the single biggest source of post-order conflict in family-law matters. A specific public location, a specific time, and a specific protocol for late arrivals or supervised handover prevents most of those disputes before they start. Structural fields:

• Default location — chip suggestions for school pickup, named public car park, police station car park (high-conflict matters), children’s contact centre
• Default time + mode — concrete times, not “during the day”
• Third-party allowed — toggle for whether either parent can delegate to a trusted family member or friend
• Late-or-absent protocol — what happens if a parent runs late; what triggers FDR

​

5. Special occasions

What it covers: birthdays, Mother’s and Father’s Day, religious and cultural festivals, public holidays. Legal framing: When the plan is silent on a date, the children are with whichever parent has them on the routine schedule that day. Setting an explicit Mother’s Day / Father’s Day rule, alternating Christmas, and naming any culturally significant dates avoids the December tension every year. Structural fields:

• Each occasion — name + allocation (User / Other / alternating odd-even / shared) + whether it overrides the routine
• Christmas / January-holiday block rule — specific to this clause (also reflected in clause 2)

​

6. School

What it covers: enrolment authority, attendance at events, who receives reports, extra-curricular consent. Legal framing: School touches all six s60CC factors — capacity, developmental needs, meaningful relationships, safety, the child’s views, and “other relevant circumstances”. Schools also need clarity on who they communicate with and who can collect the children. Structural fields:

• Enrolment authority — joint / User / Other
• Both parents receive reports — toggle (default yes)
• Both parents may attend events — toggle (default yes)
• Extra-curricular consent — either parent / joint required / parent-on-duty

​

7. Medical

What it covers: routine vs major decisions, who holds the Medicare card, emergency authority, mental-health treatment. Legal framing: A medical clause earns its place in the moments it is most needed — emergency departments ask “who has authority”. The plan needs a routine-vs-major distinction, named decision-makers, and a clear emergency escalation that doesn’t require phone tag at 2 a.m. Structural fields:

• Routine medical decisions — parent-on-duty / joint
• Major medical decisions — joint / User / Other
• Medicare-card custody — travels with the children / User / Other
• Emergency authority — parent-on-duty / either parent / joint notification before non-life-threatening
• Mental-health treatment — both parents involved (toggle, default yes)

​

8. Travel

What it covers: domestic notice for travel, overseas consent, who holds the children’s passports. Legal framing: DFAT requires both parents with parental responsibility to sign every passport application for a child under 18 (Australian Passports Act 2005). Naming a custodian for the passport — and a notice rule for any travel beyond the local area — prevents the abduction-flag scenarios the court treats most seriously. Structural fields:

• Domestic notice days — concrete number (chip suggestions: 7, 14, 30)
• Overseas consent required — toggle (default yes)
• Passport custody — travels with the children / User / Other / lawyer-held

​

9. Relocation / change of address

What it covers: how either parent notifies the other of any change of residence, and what distance triggers a renegotiation. Legal framing: Within-Australia relocation past a certain distance (commonly 50–100 km, or interstate) materially affects the child’s relationships and time with the other parent. International relocation engages the Hague Convention. A plan that names a notice period, a distance trigger, and a dispute pathway protects the child’s relationships even when life moves. Structural fields:

• Distance trigger — kilometres (chip suggestions: 50, 100, 200, 500/interstate)
• Notice days — concrete number (chip suggestions: 30, 60, 90)
• FDR before any application — toggle (default yes — section 60I already requires it for parenting applications)

​

10. Dispute resolution

What it covers: how disagreements about the plan get resolved — without going back to court. Legal framing: Section 60I of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) requires Family Dispute Resolution before a parenting application can be filed. The plan should name an FDR provider, set a cooling-off period, and describe an escalation ladder so most disputes resolve before they reach a courtroom. Structural fields:

• FDR provider — chip suggestions for Relationships Australia, Family Relationship Centre, Resolution Institute
• Cooling-off days — concrete number (chip suggestions: 7, 14, 30)
• Escalation ladder — ordered list (drag to reorder): direct conversation → written request → FDR with named provider → application to the Federal Circuit and Family Court

​

11. Review windows

What it covers: when the plan automatically comes back to the table — built-in review points so the family doesn’t need to litigate to update it. Legal framing: Section 65DAAA, in force from 6 May 2024, codifies the Rice v Asplund threshold for varying final parenting orders. Baking review windows into the plan now (starting school, age 12, secondary-school transition, end of high school) means future updates are anticipated, not contested. Structural fields:

• Review windows — list with smart suggestions based on the children’s ages (e.g. “Sophia turns 12 on 15 March 2030 — review primary→secondary school transition”)
• Each review window has a trigger (event description), anchor date (calculated from age or set explicitly), and an educational rationale that connects the review point back to s65DAAA / Rice v Asplund

​

Conditional overlays

These appear when the relevant case-file flag is set:

​

12. Family-violence safety overlay (when FV disclosed)

What it covers: explicit safeguards woven through changeover, communication, and address protections — consistent with any family-violence order in force. Legal framing: Section 60CG of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) requires every order to be consistent with any family-violence order in force and to avoid exposing anyone to an unacceptable risk. A plan that cross-references the FVO and embeds its conditions stays internally coherent.

​

13. Cultural-connection clause (when ATSI children involved)

What it covers: how the plan supports the children’s connection to their Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander culture, country, kinship, and language. Legal framing: Section 60CC(3), in its current standalone form, requires the court to consider the child’s right to enjoy their Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander culture and the impact of any orders on that connection. The plan should name the connection arrangements explicitly — including Sorry Business and significant cultural events.

​

Next