For family-law attorneys
A coordination platform whose records your client can actually file. Tamper-evident exports, sworn records-custodian declarations, and legal-hold chain-of-custody — built in, not bolted on.
Why CoParent.Help was built for family court
Verified exports, every time
Every court-ready PDF and activity-log export carries a SHA-256 hash of a canonical JSON representation of its records. The hash is written to an append-only ledger at generation time. Any byte-level change to the exported file breaks its hash and fails verification — a property any recipient can confirm at coparent.help/verify.
Records custodian declaration
One click produces a sworn declaration in the standard FRE 902(11) / 902(13) form, referencing the exported report’s hash and verification URL. Your client prints it, signs it before a notary where required, and files the signed copy alongside the report. The declaration ties uniquely to one hash — it can’t be reused against a different or altered export.
Legal hold with chain of custody
When you tell your client to preserve records, they flip one switch on their account. A dated hold record with the case number and jurisdiction lives on the ledger for the life of the account. The hold state is hashed into every subsequent export, so the preservation claim is tamper-evident — not a loose UI annotation.
Court-readable by design
Every generated PDF includes a QR code linking to the verification page plus the full hash in the footer of every page. Court clerks scan the QR; opposing counsel can confirm authenticity without issuing a subpoena. No live platform testimony required under most state-court equivalents of FRE 902(11).
Contemporaneous-record posture
Messages are append-only. The platform contains no hard- delete path for messages — senders may retract (the retraction timestamp and reason are preserved), but the content itself stays on the ledger and in exports. The business-records-exception foundation (records made at or near the time of events, in the regular course of the platform) is structural, not aspirational.
Schema-versioned outputs
Every export records the schema version it was generated under. If the platform evolves, exports from previous versions remain interpretable as-of their generation time — historical records don’t shift meaning with product updates.
What CoParent.Help does not claim
- We do not claim that any specific judge or jurisdiction will admit our exports. Admissibility is a matter for the court, governed by applicable rules of evidence, and the attorney on record.
- We do not provide legal advice. The platform is a records system; the custodian declaration is a standard template we prepare in our capacity as custodian of the underlying records.
- Exported records reflect only what users have entered into the platform. They are not a substitute for discovery, deposition, or independent forensic examination.
- We do not pay referral fees and do not participate in any arrangement that would violate applicable rules of professional conduct.
What’s in a verified export
The report (PDF)
Cover page with hash + QR + verify URL, legal preface, chronological sections (messages, calendar, expenses, journal, documents, goals), per-page verify stamp.
Custodian declaration (PDF)
Penalty-of-perjury form with five FRE-standard business- records elements, referencing the report’s hash, URL, row count, and date range. Notary block included.
Public verification page
Any recipient types the URL from the report’s footer and sees a canonical record: when issued, to whom (email masked), row count, date range covered, schema version.
Where CoParent.Help fits in a case lifecycle
The platform earns its value across the full arc of a family-law matter — not just at trial. Below is how attorneys typically integrate it at each stage.
1. Intake
At first consultation, recommend the client onboard immediately. Forward future communication with the co-parent through the platform. Every text and email outside the platform is a gap in your eventual record.
2. Discovery
Use Court-Ready Reports to satisfy production requests efficiently. The PDF + custodian declaration package responds to a request for communications, expenses, and schedule records in one filing.
3. Mediation + status conferences
Walk in with a hash-verified summary instead of competing narratives. Mediators report agreements come faster when both parties work from the same factual record.
4. Hearings + trial
Reports authenticate under FRE 902(11) / 902(13) via the custodian declaration — no live platform witness required in most state-court equivalents. Hash on the cover page lets the court verify independently of you.
5. Post-judgment
Court orders frequently require ongoing communication through a documented platform. The same record continues to build, so any future motion (modification, contempt, child-support recalculation) starts from an established audit trail.
6. Litigation hold
When a dispute crystallizes, the client flips Litigation Hold Pro. The hold is dated, case-tagged, and hashed into every subsequent export — preservation becomes part of the record itself.
Litigation Hold Pro
For the moment a dispute crystallizes into active litigation.
When the client tells you to recommend the platform for a contested matter, ask them to flip Litigation Hold Pro at the same time. This is a structural commitment, not a UI flag — once enabled, the platform writes a dated hold record to the verification ledger with the case number and jurisdiction. The hold record is hashed into every Court- Ready export generated afterward. If preservation is ever challenged, the chain of custody is part of the record itself rather than a loose UI annotation that could be dismissed.
- Append-only ledger entry with case number, jurisdiction, and date — visible in every subsequent export
- Disables data lifecycle features that could touch records (downgrade-driven retention truncation, account deletion by the user) until hold is released
- Hold state is hashed into the custodian declaration, so the preservation claim is part of the authenticated document
- Release requires affirmative action by the user (the platform never auto-releases) and the release itself is logged
Attorney FAQ
Questions we hear most often from family-law attorneys and paralegals evaluating the platform for client recommendation.
Bar ethics + professional conduct
We have built the platform to comply with the professional-conduct constraints attorneys actually operate under.
- •No referral fees, ever. We do not pay attorneys for recommendations. Any arrangement we offer a firm is procedural (direct support, paralegal access) not financial.
- •No fee-splitting. Subscription revenue from your client flows to us, not back to you in any form. We do not participate in any arrangement that would implicate Model Rule 5.4 or analogous state rules.
- •Privilege boundary respected. We never require an attorney to have access to a client's account. The Court-Ready PDF transfer is the only path for records to reach you, which keeps the attorney-client privilege boundary clean.
- •Marketing claims are conservative. We do not say "court-approved" or "court-certified" because no platform can be — admissibility is for the tribunal to decide. We describe what the platform structurally provides; we leave the legal conclusions to you.
- •Client consent is the only path to your access.If your client wants you to have visibility into their account beyond Court-Ready PDFs, we can arrange a read-only firm seat — but only with the client's explicit, on-record consent. We do not offer covert monitoring of any kind.
Beyond family-law attorneys
Several adjacent professional roles also benefit from a hash-verified family-court record. If you fit any of these, the platform fits your workflow.
Mediators
Walk into mediation with both parties working from the same hash-verified summary. Mediated agreements tend to come faster when there is no factual dispute about what happened.
Custody evaluators
Objective behavioral data — schedule timelines, payment patterns, message tone — replaces inferring patterns from two competing self-reports.
Parenting coordinators
The same record exposes non-compliance with court orders and parenting plans. Useful both for current enforcement and for documenting patterns for the next motion.
Guardians ad litem
Court-Ready Reports give a GAL the substrate they need to make recommendations rooted in documented behavior rather than parental self-presentation.
Forensic accountants
Accountable Payments + shared-goal ledgers + receipt scans together produce a financial dataset that survives forensic scrutiny better than reconstructed bank statements.
Therapists supporting separated families
A neutral, factual record can lower the temperature in family therapy by replacing dueling narratives with shared facts.
Recommend us to a client?
Reach out for direct onboarding, a private review of the verify flow with your paralegal, or to discuss Litigation Hold Pro for an active case.