Child Development and Custody: Age-Appropriate Parenting Arrangements

Why developmental stage matters

Under section 60CC of the Family Law Act 1975, courts must consider the child's developmental, psychological, emotional and cultural needs as one of six core factors when determining what arrangements serve the child's best interests.

This means the same arrangement that works beautifully for an eight-year-old may be entirely inappropriate for a six-month-old. A toddler who has never spent a night away from their primary carer has different needs from a teenager who craves independence and resents being shuttled between homes. Courts and family consultants assess each child individually — and developmental stage is central to that assessment.

Section 60CA establishes that the best interests of the child must be the paramount consideration in making parenting orders. Since 6 May 2024, courts assess this through six non-hierarchical general considerations under section 60CC(2):

• (a) Safety — including safety from family violence, abuse, neglect, or harm.
• (b) Child's views — any views expressed by the child.
• (c) Developmental needs — developmental, psychological, emotional and cultural needs.
• (d) Parental capacity — capacity to provide for the child's needs.
• (e) Relationships — maintaining relationships where safe to do so.
• (f) Anything else relevant — any other relevant factor.

Infants and toddlers (0–2 years)

The first two years of life are critical for attachment formation. Courts and family consultants focus on maintaining a secure primary attachment relationship while still supporting the child's relationship with both parents.

John Bowlby's attachment theory — now one of the most researched frameworks in developmental psychology — holds that infants are biologically programmed to form emotional bonds with caregivers. Through consistent, responsive care (feeding, soothing, holding, responding to distress), infants develop secure attachment: a sense that the world is safe and that their needs will be met. Secure attachment provides the foundation for emotional regulation, social development, and resilience throughout life.

Importantly, infants can form secure attachments with multiple caregivers — typically both parents, grandparents, and other consistent carers. The question is not whether the child should have a relationship with both parents (they should), but how that relationship is structured to support attachment security.

Key considerations for this age group:

• Primary attachment figure. Courts often recognise that one parent has been the primary carer — typically the parent who has provided most of the feeding, settling, overnight care, and day-to-day responsiveness. Maintaining this stability matters.
• Shorter, more frequent contact. Rather than long stretches away from the primary carer, shorter and more frequent visits with the other parent help build the infant's attachment to both parents without disrupting their primary security base.
• Overnight stays debate. Overnights away from the primary carer are contentious for very young infants. Some research suggests caution before 12–18 months; others argue overnights can be beneficial if the other parent is a competent, responsive carer. Courts take a case-by-case approach.
• Breastfeeding considerations. Where an infant is breastfed, courts will consider this when structuring time arrangements. Breastfeeding is not an absolute barrier to time with the other parent, but it is a relevant practical factor that may affect overnight arrangements.
• Consistency and routine. Infants thrive on predictability. Arrangements should maintain consistent sleep routines, feeding schedules, and familiar environments as much as possible.

Preschool children (3–5 years)

Preschoolers can manage more complex arrangements than infants — but still need routine, predictability, and reassurance during transitions.

Between three and five, children develop a basic understanding of time ("after sleep," "two more sleeps"), can communicate their feelings verbally (though imperfectly), and begin to form friendships outside the family. They are increasingly curious, imaginative, and capable of short separations from their primary carer — but they still rely heavily on familiar adults for emotional regulation.

Separation anxiety is common and normal at this age. A child who cries at handover is not necessarily distressed by the arrangement itself — they may simply be struggling with the transition. Consistent, calm handovers and predictable routines help enormously.

• Overnight stays with established relationships. By age three, most children can manage regular overnight stays with the other parent, provided there is an established, warm relationship. The child should feel safe and settled in both homes.
• Routine is essential. Preschoolers benefit from consistent bedtime routines, mealtimes, and familiar comfort objects (a favourite toy, blanket, or book) in both homes. Duplicating key items reduces transition stress.
• Both parents matter. Research consistently shows that children benefit from meaningful relationships with both parents. At this age, regular and predictable time with each parent supports the child's emotional development and sense of security.
• Stated preferences are unreliable. While preschoolers can say what they want ("I want to stay at Mummy's"), they lack the cognitive capacity to understand the implications of custody arrangements. Their stated preferences are often based on immediate factors — which house has their favourite toy, which parent is more permissive.
• Transition support. Visual calendars, simple countdown routines ("two more sleeps until you see Daddy"), and calm, positive handovers help preschoolers manage the movement between homes.

Primary school age (6–9 years)

School-age children are more adaptable, resilient, and socially engaged — but school logistics, friendships, and the child's developing social world add new considerations.

School becomes the child's primary external structure. Arrangements must ensure the child can attend one school consistently, with homework supervision, uniform management, and activity logistics working from both homes. Children in this age group are also building their own social world — play dates, birthday parties, and after-school activities become important.

• Proximity to school. Both parents ideally live within reasonable travel distance of the school. If one parent has relocated, the child's established school community is a significant factor courts consider.
• Week-on/week-off becomes viable. Many children in this age group manage alternating weeks well, provided the transition is smooth and both parents are actively involved in school and daily routines.
• Homework and activities. Both parents need to support homework, attend school events, and facilitate extracurricular activities. Courts view a parent's engagement with the child's education as evidence of parental capacity.
• Consistency across households. Children can adapt to two sets of routines and expectations, but similar bedtimes, homework expectations, and screen time rules across both homes reduce confusion and conflict.
• Don't ask them to choose. While children can express preferences, placing them in the position of choosing between parents causes loyalty conflicts and psychological harm. Family consultants gather children's views through professional, age-appropriate methods.

Pre-teens (10–12 years)

Pre-adolescence marks a shift: courts give increasing weight to children's preferences at this stage, while still recognising that pre-teens need protection from adult conflict.

Children at this stage have a greater capacity to understand their situation, express considered views, and participate meaningfully in discussions about their living arrangements. Pre-teens can articulate reasons for their preferences, distinguish between short-term wants and longer-term needs, and understand (to a degree) the consequences of different arrangements. Under section 60CC(2)(b), these views receive meaningful — though not determinative — weight.

Other key developmental changes at this stage:

• Peer relationships are crucial. Friendships become central to identity. Being near friends, attending the same school, and participating in shared activities matters deeply. Arrangements that isolate a child from their peer group can cause significant distress.
• Extracurricular activities. Sport, music, drama, and other activities become more demanding and important. Both parents need to support and facilitate these commitments — even when they fall on "the other parent's time." Flexibility is essential.
• Managing two households. Pre-teens are more aware of differences between homes — rules, expectations, living standards, new partners. They may play parents against each other or express preferences based on which home has fewer restrictions. Consistency between households becomes more important.
• Emerging independence. The desire for autonomy begins to grow. Pre-teens want more say in their schedules and may resist rigid arrangements. Building some flexibility into custody schedules acknowledges this developmental need without abandoning structure.

Teenagers (13–17 years)

Adolescence brings the most significant shift: teenagers have strong views, complex social lives, and a developmental need for autonomy that often sits in tension with parenting orders designed by adults.

A teenager who consistently and clearly expresses a preference based on genuine experience will have those views given significant weight by the court. In Farina & Naima [2022], the court gave significant weight to a 13-year-old's expressed wishes, finding they were "largely formed from her own experiences."

• Practical considerations dominate. School commitments (especially from Year 10 onwards), part-time work, social life, sporting commitments, and study needs often make rigid 50/50 schedules impractical. Many teenagers prefer a primary base with flexible time at the other parent's home.
• Risk of rejecting one parent. Adolescence is a period of identity formation. Some teenagers align strongly with one parent and reject the other — sometimes for understandable reasons, sometimes as a result of developmental factors, and sometimes due to parental influence. Courts and family consultants assess the basis for rejection carefully.
• Orders harder to enforce. Courts are realistic about the practical impossibility of physically forcing a 15-year-old to go somewhere they refuse to go. Orders that a teenager will not comply with may do more harm than good — damaging the very relationship they are intended to preserve.
• Developmental need for autonomy. The central developmental task of adolescence is forming an independent identity. Arrangements that deny teenagers any agency over their own lives can be counterproductive. Building age-appropriate flexibility into orders acknowledges this reality.
• Supporting identity development. Teenagers benefit from having a stable base from which to explore the world — stable friendships, consistent schooling, their own space, and increasing independence. Both parents can support this, but the physical arrangement needs to serve the teenager's developmental needs, not just the parents' desire for time.

Attachment theory and overnight stays — what the research says

Few topics in family law generate more debate than overnight stays for young children. The research does not support a blanket rule in either direction — courts take an individualised, case-by-case approach.

Dr Jennifer McIntosh's research (published in 2010, based on the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children) found that infants under two who spent one or more overnights per week away from their primary carer showed higher levels of irritability and distress compared to those with no overnights or daytime-only contact. This research was influential in Australian family law and led some practitioners to recommend against overnights for very young children.

McIntosh's findings were challenged by researchers including Professor Richard Warshak, who organised a consensus statement signed by over 100 international researchers. The critics argued that the McIntosh data did not adequately control for confounding variables (such as parental conflict levels), that the effect sizes were small, and that the research should not be used to create a blanket rule against overnights for infants. Subsequent research, including studies by Fabricius and Suh (2017), found that children who had overnights with their father in infancy showed better father-child relationships in adulthood — though these studies also had methodological limitations.

What emerges from the evidence:

• No blanket rules. Neither "no overnights before age 2" nor "overnights are always fine" is supported by the evidence. The research supports an individualised, case-by-case approach.
• Gradual increase approach. Most developmental experts support a graduated approach — starting with shorter daytime visits, progressing to single overnights, then gradually increasing overnight frequency as the child demonstrates comfort and security.
• Quality of parenting matters more. Research consistently shows that the quality of the parenting relationship — warmth, responsiveness, sensitivity to the child's cues — matters more than overnight frequency.
• Parental conflict is the key variable. High parental conflict is more damaging to children than any particular overnight arrangement. Children exposed to hostile handovers, parental denigration, and ongoing conflict fare worse regardless of the time split.
• Monitor the child's response. Rather than applying population-level research to an individual child, observe how the specific child responds to arrangements. Persistent distress, regression, sleep disturbance, or feeding difficulties may indicate that the arrangement needs adjustment.

Common questions