Sophie is eight years old. Both of her parents use a co-parenting app. The app knows everything about their custody arrangement — the schedule, the expenses, the violations. It knows nothing about Sophie.
Sophie has started having panic attacks on Sunday nights before custody transitions. Her school counsellor noticed her grades dropping on weeks following high-conflict exchanges between her parents. Her therapist would find it enormously useful to know whether Sophie’s emotional state correlates with specific calendar events or communication spikes. No app gives the therapist that data. No app tracks it at all.
She is not alone. Every child caught in a custody arrangement is invisible to every co-parenting tool on the market. The apps log the parents’ behaviour, the parents’ expenses, the parents’ schedule. The child — the person the schedule is built around — does not appear in the data.
We changed that.
Parents in contentious situations will immediately ask: who controls this data? Can my co-parent use it against me? These questions deserve direct answers before any feature is described.
Both parents see every check-in entry at the same time. Both see the same mood history, the same trend lines, the same therapist-generated insights. There is no private data between parents. This is not a tool for building evidence against a co-parent — it is a tool for understanding a child.
When the data shows a pattern — Sophie’s mood tends to be lower on transition days — the observation is framed the same way every time: “Both parents can review transition routines to see if changes might help.” Never: “This is happening in one parent’s household.” Never: “Parent A is causing this.” The data surfaces. Both parents receive it. Both are invited to respond.
A therapist granted access sees mood history, transition records, and patterns. Nothing else. Not messages between the parents. Not expenses. Not calendar events. Not anything about the parents’ relationship with each other. This is enforced at the system level, not just the interface level.
Once a day, either parent — or the child if they are old enough — answers one question: how was today?
An optional text field for a note — what made today good or hard. Optional tags let either parent add more context:
That is it. Both parents see every entry immediately. There is one entry per child per day.
Each entry records which parent had custody that day, based on the shared calendar — not manually entered. If the check-in is submitted on a custody exchange day, it is automatically flagged as a post-transition entry. That flag becomes the basis for transition pattern analysis.
Every day of the month shown as a coloured square. Great days in deep green, hard days in red, days with no check-in in grey. Tap any day to see the full entry — mood, note, tags, who logged it, which parent had custody, whether it was a transition day.
A rolling average plotted as a continuous line. Custody exchange dates marked on the axis. When the line dips around transition days and recovers in the middle of custody periods, that pattern is visible for the first time. It is data no one was capturing before.
Two hours before every custody exchange, both parents receive a reminder. Linked to that reminder: a transition checklist. Each parent completes it from their household’s perspective. Both can see both completed checklists.
Notes can be added to any item. The kind of small, specific detail that matters enormously during a handover and is easy to forget — “inhaler is in the outside pocket” — lives in the checklist, not in a message that might be missed.
The checklist is linked to the calendar exchange event. When that event is generated from the custody schedule or added manually, the checklist is created with it automatically. No additional setup required.
Any check-in submitted on a custody exchange day is automatically flagged as post-transition. No manual marking needed. The monthly report can then show something specific: Sophie’s average mood on transition days across the last three months was 3.1. Her average on non-transition days was 4.0.
That number goes to the therapist as a weekly digest. It appears in the court report if child wellbeing is included. It becomes a longitudinal record of how custody transitions are affecting the child — not an accusation, a measurement.
The frame is always collaborative: both parents receive the same data, and both are invited to think about what might help.
A child’s therapist currently sees the child once a week. They hear about the custody arrangement from the child’s perspective and from one parent’s account in a given session. They have no longitudinal mood data. No transition pattern data. No way to know whether what they are observing in the room correlates with what is happening at home.
With Therapist Share Mode, a parent grants their child’s therapist read-only access to the child’s wellbeing data. The therapist sees mood history, transition records, weekly summaries, and trend lines. They receive a weekly email digest with the previous week’s data and can log in to review patterns between sessions.
Access requires the therapist to create a verified professional account with two-factor authentication — the same infrastructure used for the attorney portal. Every action they take is logged. Access can be revoked by the granting parent at any time.
“Sophie is the entire reason the app exists. She is completely invisible to it.”
The situationSophie’s parents have co-parented for two years. Both use co-parenting apps. Those apps know the custody schedule, the expense history, every message exchanged. No one tracked Sophie.
Her school counsellor had noticed grade drops on post-exchange weeks. Her therapist suspected a correlation between her mood and transition days but had no data to confirm it. The therapist asked both parents about Sophie’s mood at home. Each gave an account from their own household’s perspective. Neither was wrong. Neither was complete.
Sophie’s therapist received weekly digests showing her mood averaged 2.8 on the seven days following custody exchanges, versus 4.1 on non-exchange weeks. The pattern was unmistakable. The therapist proposed a specific, low-conflict change: a phone call from the non-custodial parent on Sunday evenings during exchange weeks.
Both parents agreed. The call became routine.
Both parents, all children, one Pro subscription. No credit card required for the trial.
Child wellbeing data is never shared outside the family without explicit permission. Therapist access requires active consent from the granting parent.