Useless and unsupported
PAID AND WAS CANCELLED
For years, TalkingParents provided a baseline functional tier that allowed litigants to meet court-mandated communication requirements. You have since unilaterally eliminated free access tiers—forcing essential communication behind mandatory paywalls while providing an identical, un-updated software interface.
Trapping court-ordered litigants who have already paid via valid app store channels, refusing to sync verifiable transaction records, and forcing them into a state of legal jeopardy unless they capitulate to your billing errors constitutes a clear violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA - Fla. Stat. § 501.201 et seq.), breach of contract, and bad-faith business practices.
Bad calls
Highway Robbery
So don’t waste your time or your money on this app.
Response from developer
We're sorry to hear about your experience, and we understand how frustrating it can be to purchase a subscription only to have your co-parent decide not to participate. We recognize that getting both parents on board can be challenging, which is why we offer several ways for families to get started without a significant upfront commitment. Annual subscriptions are optional, and we offer flexible monthly plans. Eligible Enhanced and Ultimate monthly subscriptions also include a 30-day free trial, giving parents an opportunity to explore TalkingParents before deciding whether to continue with a paid subscription. We also know that cost and willingness to participate can present different challenges. Parents have the option to pay for their co-parent's subscription, and qualifying individuals experiencing financial hardship or domestic violence may be eligible for a fee waiver. For families navigating participation challenges, we also provide sample court-order language on our Resources for Legal Professionals page for those considering incorporating TalkingParents into their parenting plan. We encourage parents to explore these options on our website and Help Center to find the approach that best fits their circumstances. If there are extenuating circumstances surrounding your purchase, please contact our team directly at support@talkingparents.com.
Horrible
0/10
Response from developer
We understand how stressful a slow app can be, especially when you need it most. Our team would like to find out what's slowing things down for you and help resolve it. Please reach out to support@talkingparents.com or our website's live chat with your device and iOS version. Plans start at $7/month USD on our website, the most affordable all-in-one option on the market, and we offer fee waivers for financial hardship and domestic violence.
Company is dishonest and disingenuous. Intentionally puts abuse survivors in danger.
This is long, but please read, especially if you are a financially struggling parent and/or having to deal with a high-conflict, litigious, or abusive coparent.
My experience with TalkingParents has been profoundly disappointing and frightening, and I believe anyone dealing with a high-conflict co-parent should think very carefully before relying on this company.
TalkingParents is not simply an optional communication app for many of its users. In my case, use of TalkingParents is court-ordered to as a means to help me stay safe due to the co-parent's history of abusiveness. When our parenting plan was entered in 2022, TalkingParents offered a free tier, which are utilized up until recently. In June 2026, the company arbitrarily eliminated that free option, turning what had been a free court-ordered service into an ongoing financial obligation that I cannot afford.
That distinction matters enormously when you are dealing with a high-conflict or personality-disordered co-parent.
When communication is court ordered to occur through a specific platform, losing access isn’t merely inconvenient. A high-conflict co-parent can seize on any perceived technical or procedural violation and attempt to turn it into an allegation of noncompliance or contempt of court. When someone is already looking for opportunities to weaponize the parenting plan, being unable to access the court-ordered communication platform can have serious consequences, legally and logistically.
I explained those circumstances directly to TalkingParents’ "support" team, trying to get the company to understand. I repeatedly asked for supervisors or higher ranking individuals to discuss the situation that myself and many women are in, and was refused any sort of higher contact. There is no publicly available phone number, and the company relies solely on email to the "support" team.
The "support" team responses were devoid of any meaningful assistance, empathy, or a feasible solution.
Instead, I was given the proverbial runaround - again and again. This has gone on for months at this point.
TalkingParents told me that, despite me providing ample documentation of financial hardship and providing my parenting plan with the provision that court ordered the use of TalkingParents, I still needed an "indigency ruling from the court" in order to obtain a fee waiver. I then went through the lengthy and complicated process of seeking that ruling from the court, only to be told by my court that, in a nutshell, no such ruling exists.
Here is the part that TalkingParents’ marketing and customer-support responses fail to adequately acknowledge:
The “hoop” they are asking financially struggling subscribers to jump through (a standalone "ruling of indigence") is not a realistic or available option in many Superior Court jurisdictions.
In my jurisdiction, the court specifically explained that it could not issue the generalized indigency determination TalkingParents was demanding because there was no active matter to which such an order could be attached. I personally provided TalkingParents with the documentation from my superior court explaining that what they are asking for simply doesn't exist. The response I got was… **Crickets.** And, they still continue to assert that this nonexistent ruling as is a requirement to obtain their fee waiver, and that there are no exceptions.
In other words, TalkingParents directed me to obtain something that my court does not have a mechanism to issue under these circumstances.
And this isn’t a minor technicality.
For subscribers who had pre-existing court orders requiring TalkingParents before the company eliminated its free tier, this creates an impossible situation. These parents did not voluntarily choose a paid service. They entered into parenting plans when TalkingParents was available without a subscription fee, and then the company unilaterally changed the economic terms of complying with those court orders.
Now the company’s proposed solution is essentially:
“Get a court order declaring you indigent.”
But what if your court does not offer a procedure for obtaining that type of standalone order?
What exactly is the parent supposed to do then?
The answer I received was effectively: too bad. Pay us or lose access and be in contempt of your parenting plan. Full stop.
That is not a meaningful fee-waiver program. It is a purported accommodation built around a prerequisite that many of the very people who need the accommodation the most cannot feasibly obtain.
And that is particularly disturbing when you consider who is likely to be affected.
Parents using court-ordered communication platforms are not necessarily in ordinary consumer circumstances. Many of us are escaping abuse and dealing with high-conflict litigation, coercive behavior, financial hardship, harassment, threats, or vindictive co-parents who will exploit any opportunity to allege noncompliance with a parenting plan.
I am one of those people. My son and I have - quite literally - been put in grave danger due to an inability to attain TalkingParents' "fee waiver," which I'm now convinced does not even exist.
I explained to TalkingParents’ support team that I am dealing with a highly contentious and dangerous individual. I explained that I had already been threatened when I was locked out of my TalkingParents account on June 1 for my inability to pay. I explained and provided proof that my access to their platform was court ordered. I explained and provided proof of the financial circumstances preventing me from maintaining the newly imposed subscription. And and, as mentioned above, I provided them with my superior court's finding which explained that the type of court ruling they are requiring does not even exist!
There was no meaningful empathy and no actuall
