The logistics of coordination and communication can also become cumbersome with a non-live-in EOR. The competent parent likely has an established and efficient system to manage medical appointments, therapy sessions, and other essential childcare aspects. In contrast, a non-live-in EOR may struggle to stay updated on the child's ever-changing needs and medical updates, leading to potential miscommunications and delays in caregiving decisions.

Finally, the financial burden associated with a non-live-in EOR can be considerable. Hiring and compensating an external caregiver might strain the family's financial resources, especially when a competent parent who is willing and capable of providing care without monetary compensation is available. Investing in a non-live-in EOR could divert essential funds from the child's medical treatments and other necessities.

In conclusion, when a competent parent can fulfill the role of the EOR, opting for a non-live-in EOR is generally unsuitable. The competent parent's constant presence, in-depth knowledge of the child's condition, emotional connection, and established routines make them the most suitable and reliable caregiver for the child's well-being. Introducing an external caregiver might compromise the quality and continuity of care and impose unnecessary financial burdens on the family. Thus, prioritizing the competent parent as the EOR is the best approach to ensure the child receives consistent, loving, and comprehensive care.