LEGAL INSTRUMENTS TO CONSIDER IN STRUCTURING PARENTING PLANS
AbstractThe objective of this article is to provide the legal context of parenting plans in South Africa. The Children‟s Act 38 of 2005 (hereafter Children‟s Act) makes explicit provision for parenting plans. It is therefore important to analyse the relevant provisions in terms of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (1996) (hereafter Constitution) and the Children‟s Act, read together with international and regional children‟s rights instruments pertaining to parental rights and responsibilities to establish their nature and content of these plans as well as their necessity. Section 33(3) of the Children‟s Act states that a parenting plan may determine any matter in connection with parental responsibilities and rights, including (a) where and with whom the child is to live; (b) the maintenance of the child; (c) contact between the child and (i) any of the parties, and (ii) any other person; and (d) the schooling and religious upbringing of the child.
ARCHARD, D. & SKIVENES, M. 2009. Balancing a child‟s best interests and a child‟s views. International Journal of Children’s Rights, 17(1):1-21.
BARRATT, A. 2003. „The best interest of the child‟: Where is the child‟s voice? In: BURMAN, S. (ed) The fate of the child: legal decisions on children in the new South Africa. Lansdowne: Juta Law.
BASTOW, L. 2009. Parental responsibility. [Online] Available: http://www.bsdivorcesolicitors.co.uk [Accessed: 18/02/2009].
BEKINK, B. 2003. Parental religious freedom, rights and best interests of children. Journal of Contemporary Roman Dutch Law, 66:246-277.
CARTER, S., HAAVE, B. & VANDERSTEEN, S. 2010. Family restructuring therapy for high conflict families. (AFCC 46th Annual Conference, Pre-Conference Institute. The Children‟s Law Centre: Hawaii.) [Online] Available: http://www.childlawhawaii.com/guiding-values-for-child-centred-parenting-plans.php [Accessed: 01/04/2010].
CONNELL, M. 2008. Changes in the wind: parenting assessment in family dissolution matters. Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 36:13-20.
CURRIE, I. & DE WAAL, J. 2005. The Bill of Rights handbook (5th ed). Lansdowne: Juta Law.
GOULD, J.W. & MARTINDALE, D.A. 2009. The art and science of child custody evaluations (3rd ed). New York: Guilford Press.
LLOYD, A. 2002. The theoretical analysis of the reality of children‟s rights in Africa: an introduction to the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child. African Human Rights Law Journal, 2(1).
MAYA, M.M.L. 2005. Judgment in the matter between Helen Margaret Ford, appellant, and Michael George William Ford, Respondent. In: The Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa. Case No: 52/05. [Online] Available: http://www.supremecourtofappeal.gov.za /judgements/sca_judg/sca_2005/52_05.pdf [Accessed: 02/04/2010].
PRETORIUS, S. 2008. Father’s 4 justice. [Online] Available: http://www.fathers-4-justice.co.za [Accessed: 08/10/2009].
RAMOLOTJA, A.M.A. 2000. Determining the best interest of the child. [Online] Available: http://www.unisa.ac.za [Accessed: 16/02/2009].
ROBINSON, T.M. 2009. Divorce: what about the children? Cape Town: Struik Publishers.
SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS OF CHILDREN IN SOUTH AFRICA. 2009. The Presidency, Republic of South Africa: Union Building. [Online] Available: www.thepresidency.gov.za [Accessed: 28/05/2010].
SOUTH AFRICA. 1996. Constitution of the Republic of South Africa as adopted by the Constitutional Assembly on 8 May 1996 and as amended on 11 October 1996. Pretoria: Government Printer.
SOUTH AFRICA. 2006. Children‟s Act, No. 38 of 2005. Government Gazette, 28944,20060619, notice nr 610.
STAHL, P.M. 1999. Complex issues in child custody evaluations. Belmont, Calif.: Sage Publications.
STROUS, M. 2007. Post-divorce relocation: in the best interest of the child? South African Journal of Psychology, 37(2):223-244.
THAYER, E.S. & ZIMMERMAN, J. 2001. The co-parenting survival guide. Oakland, Calif.: New Harbinger Publications.
WHITE, J.G. 2005. Winning with evidence: child custody A to Z. New York: Universe.
This journal is an open access journal, and the authors and journal should be properly acknowledged when works are cited.
Social Work/Maatskaplike Werk hold copyright.
Auhtors may use the publishers version for teaching purposes, in books, and with conferences.
The following license applies:
Attribution CC BY-4.0
This license lets others distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon your work, even commercially, as long as they credit you for the original creation.
Articles as a whole may not be re-published with another journal.