Build a Parenting Plan From Client Intake
Convert client intake details into a draft parenting plan covering legal decision-making, parenting time, holiday allocation, and communication protocols, then tailor it to your state and summarize it for the client.
When to use this
You have intake notes from a custody client and need a first-draft parenting plan. This workflow walks Claude through structuring decision-making, building a parenting-time and holiday schedule, layering in high-conflict safety provisions where the facts call for them, checking the draft against any existing orders, and producing a plain-English client summary. You stay the drafter of record; Claude handles the scaffolding.
Parenting plans are a drafting workhorse of family-law practice, and they are also the documents where the stakes are most human. Behind every schedule grid and decision-making clause is a child whose week now runs on the language you choose. A blank page is costly: you rebuild the same structure, holiday by holiday, for client after client, when the variable that actually matters is the family's specific facts.
This is repetitive, structure-heavy drafting that Claude handles well. You give it the intake (custody goals, work schedules, the children's ages, the conflict level, any existing orders) and it returns a complete first draft you can react to, edit, and harden, while you keep your judgment for the parts that need it.
Two cautions frame everything below. First, parenting plans are creatures of state law: custody factors, required statutory language, relocation notice, and the best-interests standard vary by jurisdiction, and a draft that ignores your state is a liability. Second, high-conflict and safety cases need provisions that go beyond a standard schedule, and nothing in the plan may conflict with an existing protective order. Treat every output as a first draft to verify against the governing statute and the orders in the file; you are responsible for what gets filed.
The Workflow
Give Claude the family's facts
Open one Claude conversation and lay out the intake in a single structured message, with the intake notes and any existing custody or protective orders in <document> tags at the top. The more specific you are about ages, work schedules, geography, and conflict level, the less generic the draft. Keep this conversation open for every step that follows so Claude retains the full context.
Prompt<document type="client intake notes" date="[DATE]"> [PASTE INTAKE NOTES, using initials and roles for the children] </document> <document type="existing orders" description="[e.g., temporary custody order, protective order, or 'none']"> [PASTE THE OPERATIVE TERMS OF ANY EXISTING CUSTODY, SUPPORT, OR PROTECTIVE ORDER, OR WRITE "NONE"] </document> I am a family-law attorney representing [PARENT A ROLE, e.g., the mother] in a custody matter in [STATE / COUNTY]. The documents above are my intake notes and any existing orders. My goal over the next few steps is a first-draft parenting plan that reflects my client's goals and the children's best interests. Nothing will be filed without my verification against state law. Key facts, in addition to the intake notes: - Parents: [PARENT A ROLE] (my client) and [PARENT B ROLE] - Children (initials + ages only): [E.G., "J.M., age 7; L.M., age 4"] - Current custody arrangement: [DESCRIBE] - Each parent's custody goal: [PARENT A GOAL] / [PARENT B GOAL] - Work/school schedules: [WEEKLY HOURS, SHIFTS, COMMUTE] - Distance between homes: [E.G., 15 MINUTES; OR 200 MILES] - Decision-making preferences (education, medical, religion, extracurriculars): [DESCRIBE] - Conflict/safety level: [LOW / MODERATE / HIGH; NOTE ANY DV, SUBSTANCE, OR SAFETY CONCERNS] - Special needs or considerations: [DESCRIBE OR "NONE"] First, summarize the facts back to me in a short list, quoting the intake notes where they matter. Then list the operative terms of any existing order that the plan must not conflict with (quote them). Note any fact that is missing or inconsistent between my list and the notes. Finally, ask me up to 3 clarifying questions before we draft.
What you get: Claude restates the facts, quotes any existing-order terms the plan must respect, flags gaps or inconsistencies in the intake, and asks a few targeted clarifying questions (often about the exact split sought, the school calendar, or the nature of any safety concerns).
Draft the core parenting plan
Once the facts are settled, have Claude produce the full skeleton: legal decision-making, a concrete parenting-time schedule, holiday and school-break allocation, and communication protocols between the parents. Ask for a regular weekly schedule expressed as something you can drop into a calendar.
PromptUsing the facts above, draft a complete parenting plan with these sections, numbered: 1. Legal decision-making: allocate authority over education, medical/dental, religion, and extracurriculars (sole vs. joint per the facts), and state how disagreements are resolved. 2. Parenting time: a specific regular weekly schedule (name the days and exchange times) that fits both parents' work schedules and the distance between homes. 3. Holiday and school-break schedule: allocate major holidays, three-day weekends, school breaks, and each child's birthday, alternating by even/odd year where appropriate. 4. Summer/vacation: vacation time, travel notice, and out-of-state or out-of-country travel terms. 5. Exchanges and transportation: location, who transports, and handling of lateness. 6. Communication protocols: how the parents communicate about the children, expected response times, and how each parent contacts the children when in the other's care. Write in clear clause language. Flag in [BRACKETS] any place where my state's statute likely requires specific language or a specific factor I should confirm. If any term would conflict with an existing order quoted in Step 1, do not draft it; flag the conflict instead.
What you get: A structured, numbered draft plan with a concrete weekly schedule, holiday grid, and communication terms, plus bracketed flags marking where state-specific language or factors need to be confirmed and where an existing order constrains the draft.
Add high-conflict and safety provisions
If the intake flagged moderate or high conflict, domestic violence, substance concerns, or safety issues, layer in the protective terms a standard plan omits. Skip or trim this step for genuinely low-conflict, cooperative co-parents; over-drafting protective terms into an amicable plan can inflame it.
PromptThis matter has [MODERATE / HIGH] conflict with the following concerns: [LIST CONCERNS, E.G., HISTORY OF DV, ALCOHOL USE DURING PARENTING TIME, ONE PARENT WITHHOLDING THE CHILDREN]. Add a set of high-conflict and safety provisions to the plan, drawing only on what the facts support: - Supervised or therapeutic visitation terms (who supervises, where, how it steps down over time) if warranted. - Communication restrictions, e.g., a co-parenting app for all contact, no contact except about the children, no disparagement. - Safety terms: sobriety expectations and any testing, no third parties present during exchanges, neutral or public exchange locations, no firearms accessible to the children. - A right of first refusal and a clear protocol for missed or late exchanges. - A graduated dispute-resolution clause (co-parenting counseling or a parenting coordinator before court) consistent with the conflict level. Keep each provision narrowly tailored to the stated facts and cite the intake fact it rests on. Check each one against any protective order quoted in Step 1: if a provision would require contact or proximity that an order prohibits, or would be less protective than the order, flag it as a CONFLICT instead of drafting it. Flag in [BRACKETS] any provision that typically requires a specific court finding or order in my state.
What you get: A set of tailored protective clauses (supervision step-downs, app-only communication, sobriety and exchange-safety terms, right of first refusal, graduated dispute resolution), each tied to a stated fact, checked against existing protective orders, and flagged where a court finding may be required.
Tailor to state law and write a client summary
Direct Claude to localize the draft to your jurisdiction and then translate it for the client. The plain-English summary helps the client understand what they are agreeing to and surfaces questions before you finalize.
PromptTwo tasks for the [STATE] version of this plan: 1. State-law tailoring: Revise the draft to use [STATE]'s standard terminology (e.g., the state's terms for custody and parenting time), insert [STATUTORY LANGUAGE: ___] placeholders for any language the statute may require, and add a checklist of [STATE]-specific items I must verify before filing: best-interests factors, relocation or move-away notice requirements, required statutory notices, and any mandatory clauses. Do not assert a statute or rule number unless you are certain; otherwise write [APPLICABLE RULE] for me to confirm. List anything you are unsure of. 2. Client summary: Write a one-page plain-English summary of the plan for my client (no legalese) covering who decides what, the week-to-week schedule, how holidays work, and the ground rules for communication, ending with a short list of questions for the client to consider.
What you get: A state-localized draft using local terminology with a jurisdiction-specific verification checklist, plus a one-page plain-English client summary ending in client-facing questions. Treat the statutory items as prompts to confirm, not authority.
Review, verify, and finalize
Read the full draft as the responsible attorney. Confirm the schedule is internally consistent (no holiday that overlaps and contradicts the regular schedule), check every bracketed flag against your state's statute and current case law, confirm nothing conflicts with an existing protective or custody order, and verify the plan reflects the client's actual goals and the children's best interests. Independently confirm any statute, rule, or deadline Claude referenced before relying on it.
What you get: A verified, state-compliant draft parenting plan and client summary, ready for your edits and client review, with every bracketed flag resolved, every existing order respected, and all legal citations independently confirmed.
Example Output
Illustrative example — names, facts, and figures are fictional.
DRAFT PARENTING PLAN: IN RE THE CHILDREN OF A.R. AND M.R. (ILLUSTRATIVE / FICTIONAL) 1. LEGAL DECISION-MAKING The parents shall share joint legal decision-making for J.R. (age 7) and L.R. (age 4) on education, non-emergency medical, and religious upbringing. Mother shall have final decision-making authority on extracurricular activities. In an emergency, either parent may consent to necessary medical care and shall notify the other within [2 hours]. 2. PARENTING TIME (REGULAR SCHEDULE) The children shall reside primarily with Mother. Father shall have parenting time on alternating weekends (Friday 5:00 p.m. to Sunday 6:00 p.m.) and every Wednesday (after school to 7:30 p.m.). Exchanges occur at the children's school or, when school is not in session, at the [public location]. 3. HOLIDAYS Holidays alternate by year (Mother even years, Father odd). Thanksgiving and winter break are split at [midpoint]. Each child spends their birthday with the parent then scheduled, with a 2-hour visit for the other parent. Mother's Day with Mother; Father's Day with Father. 4. COMMUNICATION The parents shall communicate about the children exclusively through [a co-parenting app] and respond within 24 hours on non-urgent matters. Each parent may have a reasonable phone or video call with the children once per day while in the other's care. 5. SAFETY PROVISIONS [HIGH-CONFLICT] Neither parent shall consume alcohol within 8 hours of or during parenting time. All exchanges occur in a public location with no third parties present. Neither parent shall disparage the other in the children's presence. [Confirm whether a court finding is required for the sobriety term in this state.] [CONFLICT CHECK: Temporary protective order dated [DATE] requires exchanges through a third party. Section 2 exchange terms must be conformed. Attorney to resolve.] [ATTORNEY NOTE: Verify against state best-interests factors and the relocation-notice statute before filing. This is a first draft.]
Tips
- •Front-load the intake. The biggest driver of draft quality is the specificity of your facts: ages, exact work hours, distance between homes, and an honest conflict level. Vague inputs produce a generic plan you will rewrite anyway.
- •Paste any existing custody or protective order in Step 1, even a temporary one. Claude can then flag draft terms that would conflict with it, which is the error you least want to file.
- •Keep it to one conversation. Run all the steps in the same chat so Claude carries the family's facts forward; starting fresh for the summary or the safety provisions forces you to re-explain everything.
- •Treat every bracketed flag as a task, not a suggestion. Claude marks where state law likely controls (best-interests factors, relocation notice, mandatory clauses), but you must open the statute and confirm. Never file on Claude's word about a rule number.
- •Match the protective terms to the temperature of the case. Layering supervised-visitation and no-contact language into a cooperative co-parenting plan can manufacture conflict; reserve the safety section for facts that support it.
A note on confidentiality
Parenting-plan intake involves minors' identifying information (names, schools, addresses, medical and counseling details) and often allegations of abuse, substance use, or mental-health history about both parents. Use initials and roles for the children, leave out school names and addresses, and paste only the operative terms of protective orders rather than the full petition or police reports. Run client work on a commercial plan (Team or Enterprise) whose terms exclude your content from model training. On Pro or Max, disable model training in Privacy settings; a commercial plan's contract terms are the stronger answer for client work. Your duty under Model Rule 1.6 and ABA Formal Opinion 512 applies to AI tools as it does to any other vendor. Every output is a draft for attorney review: verify each term against the statute and the orders in the file, and verify any citation, before filing.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I file the parenting plan Claude drafts?
Not as-is. Claude produces a first draft to speed up your work, not a court-ready filing. You must verify it against your state's custody statute, the best-interests factors, any required statutory language, and any existing orders, then revise it to fit the client's goals and the children's actual circumstances. You remain the attorney of record and are responsible for what is filed.
How do I keep the children's information confidential?
Use a commercial plan (Team or Enterprise) rather than a consumer tier, or at minimum disable model training on Pro or Max, and never enter a child's full name, address, school, or other identifying details. Use initials and roles (for example, "J.R., age 7"). This supports your Rule 1.6 duty of confidentiality, consistent with ABA Formal Opinion 512.
Does this work for high-conflict or domestic-violence cases?
It can help you draft, with extra care. Step three layers in safety provisions (supervised visitation, app-only communication, sobriety and exchange-safety terms) tailored to the facts you provide and checked against any protective order you pasted. Many such provisions require a specific court finding or order in your jurisdiction, so confirm what your state requires and make sure the plan conforms to current protective orders before relying on any draft language.
Prompts used in this workflow
Get New Workflows Like This Every Week
Join the free Claude for Lawyers newsletter — practical workflows, prompts, and guides for everyday practice.