Ramifications all over the place of course.

But two things above all.

1) changing the starting place over the parenting of children whose parents live apart.

Currently one parent usually gets possession of the children, often at the very moment of parental separation.

That parent then has the right to determine that the children's relationship with the other parent is. Often they are reasonable and respectful of the children's needs and wishes. But not always. And there is nothing to say that the controlling parents may not or should not cut the other parent's role down to little or nothing. Or that he or she needs any reason before doing that - or anything else he or she desires - for good reason or bad.

If the other parent is aggrieved, he and she can sue for the child to be allowed 'contact'. If there aren't any good reasons why the child should not have it, the court will give the child contact. Although if the controlling parent is a hard player, things may be more difficult.

But it takes, the research shows, normally four or five legal hearings over an average of eleven months. Costs (not systematically researched) are probably usually several thousand pounds.

Obviously lots of parents with a lot to offer to their children are stopped by all this. Put off by the conflict, the stress, the delay, the cost. Some of which is borne not by themselves alone, but by the children and the ex.

So need one is this.

That only those children whose parents shouldn't be part of their lives should be  denied contact in the first place. 

If children are taken into local authority care - where there are grounds for fearing abuse or neglect - they have a statutory right to contact with their parents. It can be set aside for a week by social services,but needs the consent of a judge for any longer period.

Why don't children where there are no doubts about thier care, but whose parents have merely separated have a similar right?

The second need is this.

To increase the amount of time children are allowed to spend with the parent they see less of.

Currrently, when this is determined by a court order,  this is about one eight of their time. Whereas when the parents were together they spent on average something like two fifths of their time is that parent.

Obviously some good things can happen for the child (and parent) with a 'every second week-end and some of the holidays'. But some things can't. For example, knowing and helping with what is going on in school. Or seeing the 'other parent' as a role model as a worker - for they will only see him (usually him) in his time off.

There can be no arithmetic formula that is right for all -or even any - child. But there is a possible checklist of the benefits to children of having a relationship with both parents. Things like having both fully involved in their school work, having both fun and ordinary time with both parents, both their parents seeing the life of the child 'in the round' and the children knowing their parents in the round, that need to be achieved. The parenting time arrangements need to be enough and organised in a way that these benefits are delivered.

The Coalition Government has promised legislation. But what legislation? All is up for discussion. Please contribute to that discussion.