CommentaryThe rule providing for opportunities for additional parenting time promotes the concept that a child receivesgreater benefit from being with a parent rather than a child care provider who is not a household family member. Thehousehold family member is defined as an adult person residing in the household, who is related to the child by blood,marriage or adoption. The rule is also intended to be practical. When a parent's work schedule or other regularactivities require hiring or arranging for a child care provider who is not a household family member, the other parentshould be given the opportunity to provide the care. Distance, transportation or time may make the rule impractical.
The period of absence which triggers the exchange will vary depending upon the circumstances of the parties. Parentsshould agree on the amount of child care time and the circumstances that require the offer be made. It is presumed thatthis rule applies in all cases which the guidelines cover; however, the parties or a trial court may, within discretion,determine that a deviation is necessary or appropriate. Any such deviation must be accompanied by a writtenexplanation. See Shelton v. Shelton, 840 N.E.2d 835 (Ind. 2006)This section is sometimes mistakenly referred to as the “right of first refusal.” It is more accurate to refer to thissection as an opportunity to exercise additional parenting time.