Robert Garza’s ‘Time Taken, Time Back’ Why the UK Needs to Catch Up

Courtesy of Robert garza

​

The USA lives with gun crime every day.

​

The UK gave up its guns — so why are we still firing legal bullets at children through the “silver bullet” tactic in separation and divorce?

​

Image: Courtesy of Robert Garza / The Texas Insider

 

If a country still struggling with real gun violence is now tackling tactical allegations and contact interference in family law, what excuse does the UK have for tolerating a system where the same dynamics can remain profitable?

​

There’s an old saying in politics and economics: “When America sneezes, Britain catches a cold.” In family law, America is starting to reach for the medicine. The question is whether Britain will catch the cure for stolen parenting time — or keep pretending there’s nothing wrong.

​

This article sets out the case for a UK-facing Time Taken, Time Back direction: the principle that time wrongly taken from a child’s relationship with a parent should be repaired, and that the system should stop rewarding delay, obstruction, and tactical safeguarding claims.

​

1) Inspiration from the US: Robert Garza & “Time Taken, Time Back”

Caption: Robert Garza – Texas dad and Vice President of National Family Justice – whose “Time Taken, Time Back” campaign helped change the law in Texas and inspire reforms in other US states.

Alt text: “Robert Garza, a Texas father in a suit standing outside a public building, who campaigned for the ‘Time Taken, Time Back’ family law reforms.”

​

In the United States, Robert Garza is widely associated with a simple, child-centred idea:

​

If parenting time is removed on allegations or “precaution”, and those concerns are not ultimately substantiated, the child’s lost time should be restored — and the system should deter misuse of the process.

​

What matters isn’t personality or politics — it’s the incentive structure. When a system allows time to be taken and then never meaningfully repaired, “temporary” restrictions can quietly become permanent outcomes, and tactical behaviour can be rewarded.

​

Garza’s work is often referenced as an example of how lived experience, organised through a reform charity structure, can turn into practical legal rules: restore lost time, treat interference seriously, and remove the payoff from weaponizing safeguarding.

​

We are building the UK counterpart to this direction through The Absent Parent CIC. Our approach mirrors the same core principle — time wrongly taken must be restored — and adds UK-specific safeguards to stop emergency processes creating separation by drift.

​

2) The UK Problem: “Temporary” Becomes Permanent

​

In the UK, many separated families recognise a recurring pattern:

​

• A sudden allegation or safeguarding concern is raised at a critical moment
• Contact is paused, reduced, or moved into supervised-only arrangements “as a precaution”
• Delays stack up — reviews drift, reports take time, and momentum is lost
• The child adapts to absence, and the “temporary” arrangement hardens into a new normal
• Even when concerns are not upheld, the lost time is often not restored in a meaningful way

​

This is not about denying real risk. Safeguarding matters.

It is about recognising that the system can unintentionally reward misuse, because the cost of making a disruptive claim can be low — while the benefit (time, leverage, control, financial advantage, or a new status quo) can be high.

​

In the UK, delay itself can become the deciding factor. And once a “status quo” forms, it can then be cited as justification — even where that status quo was created by process drift rather than proven safeguarding need.

​

3) Where the “Silver Bullet” Tactic and US Reforms Meet

​

The “silver bullet” tactic (as many parents describe it) is simple:

​

1. Make a life-changing claim at a critical moment
2. Secure an interim advantage (no contact, restricted contact, delay, leverage)
3. Let time do the work — because delay often becomes the outcome

​

A Time Taken, Time Back approach attacks the reward structure:

​

• If time is removed on “precaution” and concerns are not substantiated, time must be repaired
• If court-ordered contact is intentionally obstructed, the court responds with repair and consequence
• Lost parenting time is treated as harm to the child, not an administrative side-effect

​

That shift matters because it changes behaviour. It reduces the incentive to obstruct, and it reduces the incentive to “fire first” knowing that time and drift will do the rest.

​

4) What a UK “Time Taken, Time Back” Package Could Look Like

​

A UK version should fit our realities: emergency applications, court delay, repeated breaches, and the use of process as punishment.

​

1) Automatic make-up time (a duty, not just discretion)

Where face-to-face time is reduced or stopped due to allegations or precaution, and those concerns are not substantiated (or can be safely managed), the court should restore like-for-like time (overnights, weekends, holidays, key dates). In serious cases, allow enhanced make-up time.

​

2) Escalating consequences for repeated breaches

After repeated proven breaches within a defined period, courts should be required to consider tighter orders, enforcement measures, and meaningful consequences. In sustained cases, persistent obstruction should be treated as a welfare issue, not merely “parental conflict”.

​

3) Costs where allegations are withdrawn / not proved / grossly exaggerated

Clearer statutory powers and presumptions so misuse of allegations to obtain advantage does not remain a cost-free strategy.

​

4) Hard time limits so “temporary” can’t become months

Any significant restriction affecting parent–child contact should include a built-in review date and rapid decision-making requirements, preventing drift from hardening into separation.

​

5) A route to challenge reliability failures quickly

Where emergency decisions were made without properly considering chronology, linked proceedings, and contact impact, there should be an expedited pathway to correct that early — not months later when the status quo has set.

​

6) Record and address patterns of emotional manipulation around contact

Professionals should be expected to record patterns of undermining behaviour around handovers/ reconnection — not to dramatise individual incidents, but to recognise cumulative harm.

​

7) A “Lost Time Register”

Start counting what’s currently ignored: days lost to suspensions, breaches, and delay, alongside outcomes. Publish anonymised aggregate data annually.

​

8) Causation review after long-term no contact

Where a child goes a prolonged period without face-to-face contact with a previously involved parent, the system should be required to record — in plain terms — what caused it: allegations, decisions, delays, breaches, and outcomes.

​

5) From Idea to UK Change

​

Garza’s work shows that reform is possible when the system is forced to stop rewarding drift and start repairing harm.

​

That is exactly what we are building in the UK.

​

The Absent Parent CIC’s mission is to mirror this reform direction in England & Wales — stopping emergency processes being weaponised, preventing separation-by-drift, and ensuring that when time is wrongly taken through delay, obstruction, or fabricated/knowingly misleading claims or evidence, children get that time back and the tactic stops paying.

​

Our immediate priority is LOTTIE’s Law — a UK package aimed at the emergency stage, where damage is often done fastest and drift begins:

​

• Mandatory reliability checks when emergency orders may affect child arrangements
• Rapid review and hard time-limits so “temporary” cannot become months
• A face-to-face backstop (the “parachute”) so drift cannot quietly become separation
• Repair mechanisms so time wrongly lost is restored — and misuse does not get rewarded

​

If “when America sneezes, Britain catches a cold” has ever been true, Britain should be catching the cure here — not the disease.

​

If you support LOTTIE’s Law and a UK Time Taken, Time Back direction, get in touch and state your support.

​

Footer blurb (drop-in)

LOTTIE’s Law (Loss Of Time Through Invented Evidence) — The Absent Parent CIC’s UK reform package mirroring “Time Taken, Time Back”: emergency-stage reliability safeguards, rapid review, hard time-limits, a face-to-face “parachute” against drift, and make-up time where court-ordered contact is wrongly lost.