Introduction
These Guidelines are intended to protect the safety and welfare of children, adults, and parenting time supervisors when other less restrictive methods of ensuring a child(ren)’s well-being during parenting time cannot be achieved. After providing for safety, the best interest of the child is the paramount consideration at all stages and particularly in deciding how and under what conditions supervision is ordered. Supervised parenting time may be considered as a means of reducing the risk of physical, emotional, and/or psychological harm both to children and parents, while also retaining the opportunity for children and non-custodial parents to have time together. In general, professional parenting time supervision is intended to be a short-term, temporary means to ensure the safety and welfare of the child(ren) until further investigation and determinations can be made, or the safety issues are eliminated.
These Guidelines outline the procedures for appointing a professional parenting time supervisor and define the duties of professional parenting time supervisors. Unless specified otherwise, these Guidelines are designed to apply to all professional parenting time supervisors appointed by the Court. Although accountable to the Court, a professional parenting time supervisor is not a party to the court proceeding.
When the issue of supervised parenting time comes before the Court, the Court has the option of ordering no supervision, supervision by a non-professional supervisor, supervision by a professional supervisor, or supervision at a parenting time center.
The determination of the type of supervisor, the type of supervision necessary for each case, the ratio of supervisor to child(ren) and the terms and/or limitations of the supervised parenting time shall be made based upon the consideration of the:
- potential risks of physical, emotional, and/or psychological harm to the child(ren) posed by contact with a non-custodial parent against the potential harm that might result from delaying, reducing, or terminating contact;
- risks parent-child contact presents to all members of the family, including, but not limited to, parents, siblings, and guardians;
- specific needs of the individual child(ren) and family, including any language needs and/or disability-related accommodations required;
- local resources; - protection provided by supervised parenting time;
- qualifications of the supervisor and capacity of that supervisor to provide the type of service being considered; and
- financial situation and resources of the parties, including transportation needs.
Although the Court makes the final decision as to the order for supervised parenting time, the Court may consider recommendations and/or agreements reached by the parties and their attorneys, probation officers, guardians ad litem, clinicians, and the attorney for the child, if any.
In cases involving allegations of family violence, sexual abuse, sexual exploitation, or threat of child abduction, there should be a specific initial assessment by the Court of the safety needs of Page 4 of 18 the child(ren), the child(ren)’s need for access to the alleged perpetrator, and the impact of interrupting parent-child contact. The Court may appoint a Category E guardian ad litem to assist with this assessment.
A special thank you must be given to the members of the Professional Parenting Time Working Group and the staff of the Administrative Office of the Probate and Family Court who worked on these Guidelines. As a result of their expertise and dedication, Massachusetts has comprehensive guidelines that benefit everyone who is faced with supervised parenting time issues.
- David Calvo
- Lisa Danovitch, Senior Court Clinician, Probate and Family Court
- Patricia Kelleher, Family and Community Resources
- Tammy Mello, The Key Program (formerly with Children’s League of Massachusetts)
- Laurie Plante, Chief Probation Officer, Probate and Family Court
- Thomas Ritter, J.D., Ph.D., Atwood & Cherney, P.C.
- Marguerite Riley, Statewide Supervisor, Massachusetts Probation Service, Probate and Family Court
- Jamie Sabino, Esq., Deputy Director of Advocacy, Massachusetts Law Reform Institute
- Diane Beswick, Esq., Managing Attorney, Probate and Family Court
- Denise Fitzgerald, Esq., Manager of Legal Research Services, Probate and Family Court
- Brian Pariser, Esq., Deputy Legal Counsel, Probate and Family Court