Florida does not call it custody anymore. Since 2008, the statute has used the word timesharing, and every case involving a minor child requires a written parenting plan judged against the 20 best-interest factors in Fla. Stat. § 61.13. Attorney Steven C. Fraser handles parenting plans, child support, paternity, relocation, and modification personally — from first call through final judgment. No associates. No handoffs.
Steven C. Fraser, Esq. (FL Bar No. 625825, DC Bar No. 460026, Florida Supreme Court Certified Mediator Cert. No. 37256 CFR) is a Jacksonville child custody and timesharing attorney practicing in the Fourth Judicial Circuit — Duval, Clay, and Nassau Counties — and throughout Northeast Florida. Services include parenting plans, timesharing schedules, child support under Fla. Stat. § 61.30, paternity, relocation under § 61.13001, and modification and enforcement of existing orders. Call 877-862-7188 or schedule online at calendly.com/fraserlawfl.
Clients walk into the office asking who is going to get custody. The honest answer is: neither of you, because Florida stopped using that word almost two decades ago. In 2008 the Legislature rewrote Fla. Stat. § 61.13 and deliberately scrubbed out the terms custody, primary residential parent, and visitation. What replaced them is the language you now see on every Florida family-law order: shared parental responsibility, parenting plan, and timesharing schedule.
The vocabulary change was not cosmetic. It signaled that Florida courts were abandoning the old winner-loser model, in which one parent “won custody” and the other parent got visitation on alternating weekends. In its place, the statute starts from the premise that both parents share parental responsibility — meaning joint authority over major decisions — unless the court finds that shared responsibility would be detrimental to the child.
Effective July 1, 2023, Florida added a rebuttable presumption of equal timesharing. Fifty-fifty is now the statutory starting point. But “rebuttable” is the operative word: a judge can deviate based on the preponderance of the evidence weighed against the 20 best-interest factors. Understanding how to either defend or rebut that presumption is the central task of a modern Florida timesharing case.
Florida judges do not pick a “better parent.” They weigh the evidence against a fixed, statutory list of 20 factors. No single factor controls, and the judge must make written findings on each one that is relevant.
Full list at Fla. Stat. § 61.13(3)(a)-(t). Courts may also consider “any other factor that is relevant.”
Florida will not dissolve a marriage with minor children — or close a paternity action — without an approved parenting plan in place. It is not optional. Even in uncontested cases, the judge must review and sign off on a written plan before final judgment.
A Florida parenting plan must address three things: a time-sharing schedule showing where the child spends every night of the year (regular, holiday, summer, school breaks, birthdays); allocation of decision-making authority over education, non-emergency healthcare, religious upbringing, and extracurriculars; and the communication rules between parents and between each parent and the child when in the other home. Most plans also include exchanges locations, rules for introducing new partners, and travel consent procedures.
The standard default in Florida is shared parental responsibility, meaning major decisions are made jointly. A court will only award sole parental responsibility if it finds that shared responsibility would be detrimental to the child — a high bar usually reserved for cases involving domestic violence, substance abuse, or abandonment.
A parenting plan is not a one-time document. It is the operating manual for a co-parenting relationship that may last 15 or 18 years. Build it to solve the problems you expect, not just the problems you feel today.
Florida calculates child support using the Income Shares Model. The premise is simple: the child is entitled to roughly the same share of combined parental income they would have received if the family were intact. The guidelines worksheet in § 61.30 takes both parents' net monthly incomes, applies them to a statutory support schedule, and produces a base obligation.
Timesharing directly affects the number. When a parent has at least 20 percent of overnights — 73 nights per year — a gross-up formula applies that accounts for the duplicated cost of maintaining two households. Equal timesharing does not zero out support, because parents almost never have equal incomes. It simply narrows the differential.
Four items sit on top of the base obligation and are split proportionally by income: health insurance premiums attributable to the child, work-related daycare, uninsured medical expenses, and sometimes extracurricular costs. Getting these add-ons right at the outset avoids years of post-judgment disputes.
Few mistakes undo a parent's position faster than moving without following the relocation statute. Florida defines relocation as any move of 50 miles or more from the principal residence at the time of the last order, for at least 60 consecutive days. That threshold often catches clients by surprise — a move from Jacksonville to Gainesville or Daytona Beach triggers the statute.
Two paths forward: get the other parent's written consent, signed and filed with the court along with a revised parenting plan; or file a petition to relocate and obtain a court order before you move. A parent who relocates without consent or order risks an immediate order to return, a contempt finding, and a permanent adverse mark on future timesharing decisions.
Florida parenting plans are final orders, but life keeps moving. To modify a timesharing schedule or decision-making allocation, the movant must prove an unanticipated, substantial, and material change in circumstances since the last order — and that modification is in the child's best interest. This is a higher bar than the original determination, and for good reason: Florida does not want children's schedules relitigated every time one parent is unhappy.
Enforcement is different from modification. When a parent willfully refuses to follow the plan — withholding the child, skipping exchanges, refusing to pay ordered support — the remedy is a motion for contempt. Florida courts have broad authority: make-up timesharing, fee awards, monetary sanctions, and in extreme cases incarceration until the offending parent complies.
For unmarried parents, the mother is the sole legal parent at birth. Being named on the birth certificate does not, by itself, give the father legally enforceable timesharing or decision-making rights. Paternity must be judicially established first.
Three routes: a voluntary acknowledgment of paternity signed by both parents (typically at the hospital); administrative paternity through the Florida Department of Revenue in a child-support case; or a paternity action under Chapter 742 that establishes paternity, sets a parenting plan, and calculates child support in one judgment. For fathers who want enforceable time with their child, the third route is almost always the right one. Until a paternity judgment is entered, a father has no court to call when the other parent denies him time.
Child custody work is personal. Every call, every hearing, every mediation is handled by Attorney Fraser directly — not an associate, not a paralegal running the file while the lawyer signs the pleadings. Clients get one phone number, one email address, and one attorney who knows the case from the first consultation through final judgment.
Attorney Fraser is also a Florida Supreme Court Certified Family and Circuit Civil Mediator (Cert. No. 37256 CFR). That credential cuts two ways. In contested cases, it means the lawyer at counsel table has sat in the mediator's chair hundreds of times and knows what a case looks like from the neutral's perspective — invaluable for building a settlement posture. In cooperative cases, Attorney Fraser can step into a pure mediation role and help parents draft their own plan without litigation.
Every case is prepared as if it is going to trial, because that preparation is what produces favorable settlements. Most timesharing cases resolve short of a final hearing, but they resolve on terms reflecting what both sides think a judge would actually do. Good preparation shapes that calculation.
Plain-English walkthroughs of the issues that come up most in Jacksonville timesharing cases.