NewsTalk 1010: When to Change Custody - Featuring Laura Paris, Shulman & Partners

A highly publicized custody dispute out of the U.K. has reignited discussion around how courts assess parenting decisions in the age of social media and reality television. After a young child appeared on a morning television show amid growing public criticism of her involvement in pageants and online branding, her father sought renewed access through the courts, arguing the situation had crossed a line. The case raises difficult questions that resonate well beyond one family or one country: when does parental discretion become a legal concern, and how much weight should public opinion carry in custody decisions? In a Newstalk 1010 segment examining these issues, Laura Paris, Associate Lawyer at Shulman & Partners LLP, provided legal context around custody variations, material changes in circumstances, and how courts consistently centre decisions on a child’s well-being rather than parental conflict or media attention.

“Ultimately what it comes down to is not necessarily public opinion or even necessarily what the father thinks is best, but what is best for the child.”
— Laura Paris, Associate Lawyer, Shulman & Partners LLP

The case discussed on Newstalk 1010 involves a father who initially agreed to sole caregiving by the child’s mother but later sought renewed access after becoming concerned about his daughter’s public exposure through pageants, social media, and television appearances. While the public reaction to the child’s lifestyle was strong, Laura emphasized that courts do not decide custody matters based on backlash or media commentary.

She explained that custody and access decisions are governed by a single guiding principle: the best interests of the child. This assessment goes far beyond whether a parent approves of certain activities. The court must determine whether a child is being harmed or placed at risk, not whether one parent disagrees with the other’s parenting choices.

Laura noted that while a parent’s regret over a past custody agreement does not automatically justify a change, courts do recognize that circumstances evolve. A parent’s improved stability, lifestyle changes, or increased capacity to support a child may qualify as a material change in circumstances, opening the door for a variation of an existing order if it benefits the child.

She also highlighted the limits of relying on a child’s stated preferences, particularly at a young age. While a child may express enjoyment of certain activities, that alone does not determine what is appropriate or healthy in the long term. In situations involving public exposure or potential emotional consequences, she noted that professional assessments are often necessary. Child-focused professionals can help determine whether activities align with the child’s developmental needs and emotional well-being.

Importantly, Laura cautioned against framing custody disputes as moral judgments of parenting styles. Courts focus on outcomes, not aesthetics or popularity. Decisions are rooted in evidence, expert input, and the child’s lived experience, not assumptions or internet reactions.

The discussion underscores a broader reality for modern families navigating separation in a digital age. As children increasingly appear online and in public-facing roles, parents and courts alike must carefully balance opportunity, consent, and protection, always returning to the same legal anchor: the child’s best interests.

Listen to the full NewsTalk 1010 interview here.

This media appearance is part of Shulman & Partners LLP’s ongoing contributions to Canadian family law discussions. Explore more of our media features in our In the Media archive.