Should I record phone calls with my co-parent?

Recording laws vary by Australian state. Some states require consent from one party only; others require both. Even where lawful, recordings can be evidentiarily complicated. The simpler advice is to keep substantive communications in writing on a platform that produces a verifiable record. If a phone call needs to happen, follow up in writing afterwards summarising what was discussed.

What is the best app for documenting co-parenting communication?

The strongest evidentiary record comes from platforms that store every message server-side, hash-chain or otherwise lock in integrity, server-clock timestamps, and produce a court-shape PDF export. Our Family Wizard, Talking Parents, and It's In Writing all do this. We have a comparison guide of the alternatives in Australia that breaks down the practical differences.

Do I need to document everything, or just the difficult conversations?

Document everything. The court reads context. A record of routine pickup messages alongside the disputed ones strengthens the credibility of the disputed ones — it shows the difficult messages are not cherry-picked but part of an ongoing pattern. Selective preservation looks suspicious.

What format should the record be in for court?

PDF is the universal court-friendly format. The PDF should include sender, recipient, timestamp, message body, and any integrity markers (hashes or signatures) the platform produces. Most purpose-built co-parent platforms generate this format directly.

How do I prove the messages have not been altered?

Use a platform with cryptographic integrity (hash-chained messages, where each message is mathematically linked to the previous one). The chain breaks if any message is altered, which is detectable. Without that, you rely on the platform's general reputation for integrity — sufficient for most matters, weaker if the other party seriously challenges it.

What if my co-parent refuses to use a documenting platform?

You cannot force them. Practically, you can: use the platform anyway and write your messages there, screenshot the platform to show your record-keeping discipline, ask the other parent in writing why they prefer non-platform channels (the answer can itself be informative), and if a matter is live, mention to your lawyer that the other party refuses platform-based communication. Some platforms (It's In Writing) make reading free for the receiving parent, which removes the most common excuse.

Can I submit emails as evidence too?

Yes — emails are admissible on the same basis as text messages and platform communications. They are electronic records under the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth). Emails are particularly strong for matters involving formal arrangements (school enrolment, medical decisions) where the back-and-forth has a clear paper trail.

How long should I keep the record?

Indefinitely while the matter is potentially live. Even years after a settlement, sub-issues can re-open (relocation, schooling changes, child-support reviews). Export periodically and store the exports securely — don't rely on the platform to retain forever.

How to document co-parent communication for court (Australia)

If you are reading this, you have probably been told — by a lawyer, a friend, or a court — that you need to keep a written record of communication with your co-parent. The instruction is correct. The how-to is rarely explained in a useful way.

This is the practical step-by-step for documenting co-parent communication in Australia, written for parents preparing for or already in matters before the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (FCFCOA). I built It's In Writing after spending three years documenting through OFW, so the advice here is informed by real time on the platforms — not just legal theory.

I am not a lawyer. This is general information, not legal advice. For your specific matter, talk to a family lawyer.

The principle

Good documentation is not about preserving evidence of bad behaviour. It is about producing a complete, neutral, verifiable record of all communication. The court reads context. A reliable record of the routine alongside the difficult is what gives the difficult messages their credibility.

Five qualities define a good record:

Complete — every relevant communication, not selected ones.
Verifiable — the other party cannot credibly claim the record is fabricated or altered.
Timestamped — server-clocked, not device-clocked.
Bidirectional — your messages and theirs, in chronological order.
Exportable — into a format you can hand to a lawyer or the court.

The qualities above are most easily produced by a purpose-built platform. They are difficult to produce from SMS, harder still from voice or in-person communication.

Step 1 — pick the right platform

Use a tamper-resistant platform from the start. The strongest evidentiary record comes from platforms with these properties:

Server-stored messages. Not on a phone that could be lost, broken, or compromised.
Tamper-resistance. Cryptographic integrity (hash chains) or append-only database design that prevents UPDATE/DELETE.
Server-clocked timestamps with timezone information.
Read receipts recorded server-side.
Court-shape PDF export with integrity markers.

The four serious options for Australian parents are Our Family Wizard, Talking Parents, 2houses, and It's In Writing. We have a full comparison guide that breaks down what each does well.

Step 2 — get the other parent on the platform

A platform record is only as strong as the participation it has. If only you are on the platform and you screenshot your one-sided messages, you have produced a worse record than if you had used SMS.

Three approaches that work:

Suggest it as the platform-of-record up front. Frame it as a tool that benefits both parties — it removes ambiguity about what was said and when, which protects everyone.
Make it cheap or free for the receiving parent. Some platforms (Talking Parents free tier, It's In Writing's "reading is always free") remove the cost objection.
Document the request. If they refuse, the refusal itself is a fact that can be relevant later. Send the platform invitation by email, keep the email, move on.

If the other parent absolutely will not use a platform, you have a harder problem. SMS or email is your fallback, and the documentation discipline below applies even more strictly.

Step 3 — write every message as if a judge will read it

This is the single most important habit. Every message you send should be:

Brief — only what needs saying.
Informative — facts, not feelings or attributions.
Friendly — neutral tone, not warm but not hostile.
Firm — clear about what you are asking or stating.

This is the BIFF method (Bill Eddy's Brief, Informative, Friendly, Firm). We have a separate practical guide on BIFF. The principle is that messages written for evidentiary use should be the version of you that you would be happy for a stranger to read aloud in court.

Specifically:

Don't editorialise. Don't characterise the other parent's actions, intentions, or character.
Don't escalate. Don't reply to provocation in kind. Reply factually, or wait until you can.
Don't apologise for being on the record. "Sorry to keep messaging here, just trying to be thorough" undermines your own discipline. The platform is the platform.
Don't share too much context. A message about a school excursion is not the place to discuss broader grievances.

The discipline serves you both ways: it produces a record that reads well, and it protects you from your own worst messages.

Step 4 — export periodically

Even on a tamper-resistant platform, you should not rely on indefinite retention. Export your record to PDF every three to six months and store the PDFs securely.

"Securely" means:

At least one offline copy. External hard drive, USB, archived in a personal cloud service.
One copy with a trusted third party (often your lawyer, if you have one). They will retain documents related to the matter.
Backed up. If your only copy is on the device you message from, a phone loss or laptop failure can lose years of record.

The exports should include the full chronological record, not just selections. Selection comes later, when a specific matter is being prepared.

Step 5 — preserve incidents that aren't text

Some communications happen in person, by phone, or in passing. These are harder to document but still matter.

For phone calls:

Default to writing instead. If the other parent calls about a substantive issue, ask them to send it on the platform. "I'd prefer to keep this in writing — could you message me on [platform]?"
If a call has happened, follow up in writing. "Just to confirm what we discussed on the phone today: [summary]. Let me know if I have anything wrong."
Don't rely on memory. A two-line summary message sent within the hour is worth more than a perfect recollection three months later.

For in-person handovers and incidents:

Send a follow-up message recording what happened. "At the 4pm handover today: [neutral factual summary]." Keep it factual; don't editorialise.
If anything significant happened, write it up the same day.
Don't ambush the other parent with a written account weeks later. The contemporaneous record is what carries weight.

Step 6 — work with your lawyer (if you have one)

If you have a lawyer, ask them specifically:

"What evidentiary properties do you actually need from a record?"
"Are there specific incidents I should be more thorough about documenting?"
"Should I be sending you periodic exports, or only when the matter is live?"
"Is there a platform you specifically prefer or recommend?"

Don't assume. Different lawyers have different preferences and different matters need different documentation rigour.

What NOT to do

A few common mistakes worth flagging:

Don't keep a private journal that you intend to use as evidence. Contemporaneous diaries are admissible but weight is variable. They are weaker than messages the other party also sent or received.
Don't fabricate, edit, or annotate a record. Even small amendments destroy credibility entirely.
Don't delete messages you regret. "Selective preservation" is a phrase you don't want a court to apply to your record.
Don't share the record publicly. Social media posts of co-parent messages can violate privacy obligations and complicate matters significantly.
Don't rely on the other parent to keep their copy. They might delete. They might lose. The record needs to exist independent of their cooperation.

Try It's In Writing

If you want a platform built specifically for this — Australian, hash-chained, A$39.95 per parent per year — start free. Five messages on signup, no card required. Reading is always free for the parent you invite, which removes the most common reason for the receiving parent to refuse the platform.

The record matters. Document deliberately and from the start. The matter you might never need to prove is the easiest one to document well.