By Michael Phillips — FLBayNews
A heated debate in South Carolina over shared-parenting reform is drawing national attention—and offering lessons that Florida should not ignore.
In a new FITSNews op-ed, South Carolina businessman and reform advocate Rom Reddy takes aim at a local attorney’s criticism of a proposed 50/50 parenting time presumption. The bill would guarantee equal parenting time unless credible evidence of abuse is presented. Reddy makes an argument that resonates across state lines: family courts have accumulated too much power, too little oversight, and far too much discretion over parents’ rights.
And while Florida passed a version of a 50/50 parenting presumption in 2023—after years of legislative battles—the challenges playing out in South Carolina mirror issues still raised by Florida families today: inconsistent rulings, ambiguous standards, costly guardian ad litem (GAL) involvement, and the fear that unfounded allegations can derail a parent’s relationship with their child.
Reddy’s Core Argument: Equal Parenting Isn’t Radical—It’s Constitutional
At the heart of Reddy’s article is a simple question:
Why should the government dictate parenting arrangements for fit parents when research overwhelmingly shows children thrive with two involved parents?
Reddy argues the proposed South Carolina law restores balance to a system that currently allows unproven accusations or temporary hearings to strip one parent—usually the father—of meaningful access. According to Reddy, this presumption:
- Promotes stability for children
- Prevents weaponization of temporary hearings
- Protects due process
- Reins in excessive GAL and DSS influence
He also points to a troubling trend: a significant portion of custody cases involve questionable or exaggerated claims that are never proven in court. Florida parents familiar with contentious custody battles will recognize this pattern.
Where the Debate Really Hits Home: Limited-Government Concerns
From a center-right perspective, the most compelling part of Reddy’s op-ed isn’t the rhetorical sparring—it’s the reminder of what family court has become in many states:
- A bureaucratic ecosystem with little oversight
- A system where temporary rulings function as final outcomes
- A venue where parents must spend thousands fighting government-appointed evaluators or attorneys
- An arena where judges exercise sweeping discretion with no standardized accountability
In Florida, despite statutory reform, these criticisms persist. Many parents still report:
- Vastly different outcomes depending on the judge
- GAL fees exceeding $5,000–$10,000
- Delays that stretch cases beyond a year
- A tendency to sidestep due process in emergency hearings
Reddy’s critique of South Carolina’s system serves as a broader indictment of how family courts nationwide can drift far beyond their intended purpose.
The Bigger Issue: Do Family Courts Trust Parents?
Reddy frames the central philosophical conflict clearly:
“We cannot design a system that punishes the vast majority to protect against a small minority.”
This sentiment echoes a growing national movement. Whether in Florida, South Carolina, or elsewhere, parents across the political spectrum are questioning systems that default to government-managed parenting plans instead of empowering families themselves.
And Reddy’s point resonates strongly within conservative circles:
If the government trusts parents to raise their children, why does it not trust them to share parenting time absent proven abuse?
What Florida Should Take Away
South Carolina’s fight reflects three issues still relevant in Florida:
1. Presumptions Are Only as Strong as the Judges Applying Them
Florida has a 50/50 presumption—but discretionary exceptions remain broad. Without enforcement standards, a presumption can become a suggestion.
2. Oversight of GALs and Family Court Professionals Is Still Weak
Florida, like South Carolina, faces recurring complaints about:
- Unregulated GAL fees
- Conflicts of interest
- Reports built on subjective impressions instead of evidence
3. False Accusations Still Lack Real Penalties
Just as Reddy argues in South Carolina, Florida has no meaningful deterrent for knowingly false claims that can dramatically alter custody.
4. Rural and Low-Income Families Bear the Worst Burden
Court delays, mandatory mediation costs, and GAL involvement disproportionately hurt working families who cannot afford to fight prolonged legal battles.
Why This Matters for Florida Readers
Florida has been a national leader in shared-parenting reform. But as South Carolina’s debate shows, the battle doesn’t end when a bill passes. A presumption is only effective if:
- Courts follow it consistently
- Oversight and accountability exist
- Parents understand their rights
- Evidence-based adjudication replaces subjective decision-making
In other words:
Reform must continue, not conclude.
If Florida wants to avoid the kinds of controversies roiling South Carolina—“slanted opinions,” accusations of legislative capture, and public distrust—state lawmakers and family courts must ensure equal-parenting principles are fully implemented, enforced, and protected.
Bottom Line
South Carolina’s fight is not just about one bill.
It’s about whether family courts serve families—or whether families end up serving the system.
Florida should take note.
Florida Bay News 
Leave a comment