In my experience dealing with custody agreements, the right of first refusal is often seen as a flexible legal tool rather than a rigid rule. What that means is, it can indeed be granted to only one parent, depending on what serves the child's best interests. For example, if one parent is more available or willing to care for the child during the other parent's absence, the court may grant that parent the right to be offered first refusal before any third-party care is arranged. The key point is that the court’s decisions revolve around the child’s well-being and stable environment. It doesn’t have to be symmetrical or automatically apply mutually. This flexibility is important because every family’s circumstances differ, and courts have the authority to attach specific conditions to parenting arrangements to reflect that. From a practical perspective, having a one-sided right of first refusal can reduce conflicts by setting clear expectations about childcare responsibilities. However, it requires clear communication and a good-faith approach from both parents. Documenting these arrangements formally in custody orders can prevent misunderstandings and ensure enforceability. Ultimately, if you're considering this type of arrangement, it helps to consult with a family law professional who can provide advice tailored to your unique situation and help the court see how this setup benefits the child’s interests above all.