Right of First Refusal Agreement between separated parents

Right of First Refusal (ROFR) refers to an agreement between separated parents such that they will first go to each other if in need of a care provider for the child (babysitter).

Article by Gary Direnfeld (Canadian Social Worker), November 23, 2014.

Right of First Refusal (ROFR) refers to an agreement between separated parents such that they will first go to each other if in need of a care provider for the child (babysitter).

ROFR is a Pandora’s box (a process that generates many complicated problems as the result of unwise interference in something)!

Parents who otherwise get along well and respect each other’s role in the child’s life will typically rely on the other for this requirement. However, parents who do not get along well and where one may try to limit the other’s time with the children (or mutually fight over parenting time) will squabble about what situation triggers this right – be it one hour’s need for care, overnight need for care or anything between or greater.

Assuming parents agree on what triggers the need for an ROFR provision, then when the need arises, higher conflict parents may then be seen to play games around “was one really away from the kids for the duration required to trigger the provision?”. In other words, parents who do not want to get along and who do not want to provide any additional time with the kids beyond the residential schedule or use the children as pawns in their dispute, will always find ways to manipulate this provision. Because the provision is there and if it is being manipulated, it keeps tensions and conflict between the parents alive to which children are inevitably exposed.

If you are going to have a ROFR provision in your parenting plan, the parents must possess the capacity to honour the agreement. If there is concern they will not do so, then it is best to leave it out. Parents do argue strenuously at times for it to remain in and to have mechanisms for enforcement. Still it will likely be better for the children to leave it out.

When we consider that conflict is the most salient predictor of poor developmental outcomes for children of separated parents, then less contact and more peace is actually better for the child.

The greater the conflict between the parents the more the need for a rigidly structured and easy to implement parenting plan, which keeps the need for parental communication and co-operation to a minimum.

In circumstances of high conflict, parents should use whomever they want to babysit and if they come to use each other, consider it a bonus. However, using or not using each other is a knife that cuts both ways. If one doesn’t rely on the other, both should know what to expect in kind. Entrenching a provision that is likely doomed from the start to create conflict is apt to be worse for the child than the loss of extra time with the other parent. Sad, but true – mitigating conflict is more important.

Don’t go “courting” a Pandora’s box.