iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Joseph Nowinski, Ph.D.

GET UPDATES FROM Joseph Nowinski, Ph.D.
 

Does Divorce Inevitably Damage Children?

Posted: 06/20/2011 3:43 am

Most divorcing parents' greatest fear is the effect it will have on their children. These fears have their origin in a time when divorce was a rare event. Fifty years ago, children from divorced parents were commonly described as coming from "broken homes," and they had to live with the stigma that such a phrase implies. To compound matters, early research on the effects of divorce--which got a lot of attention because it was news--reinforced the notion that virtually all children were negatively affected, and for their entire lives.
There is no denying that, on the list of stressful life events, divorce ranks high. For children it represents an ongoing crisis that has the potential to turn their lives upside down. That said, it is possible for children not only to survive this crisis, but to emerge from it stronger and happier in the long run.

What We Now Know About Divorce
Early research on the effects of divorce on children, which drew a gloomy picture to say the least, were based on studies with very small sample pools and were limited to what children reported in interviews. More importantly, these studies failed to compare children of divorce to children from so-called "intact" families, to see what if any differences there were between these two groups. For example, are teenagers from divorced families any more moody than teens from two-parent homes?
Fortunately, additional research on children and divorce has emerged. Included are studies that followed large groups of children over a period of years. The data collected by these researchers was based on observational studies and interviews that were conducted at regular intervals, as well as objective personality and academic achievement test scores. Moreover, the researchers were able to compare children whose parents were divorced to children whose parents were not. This research has led to a much clearer and more focused picture of the effects of divorce on children.
What the researchers found was that, three years after separation or divorce, the divorced children were, as a group, more similar to children of intact families than different. In other words, divorce does not invariably lead to psychological, social, legal, or academic problems. At the three-year mark, the majority of children of divorce appear to have weathered the storm, psychologically speaking, and are no different from their non-divorced peers.
As encouraging as these new data are, these same researchers did identify a minority--25 percent--of divorced children who were experiencing significant problems that would need to be addressed if these children were to get back on track, developmentally speaking. These included social, academic, and/or psychological problems.

Three Crucial Years
What parents need to know about divorce and its potential effects on their children are:
· The first three years seem to be crucial. Your child can emerge from the next three years a more resilient, self-confident individual. Your child is perfectly capable of surviving this upheaval, but will likely need some support and guidance along the way.
· There is some risk. Although three out of four children weather the storm of divorce (and may even emerge more resilient), one in four may stumble. Your goal as a parent is not to prevent your child from ever experiencing a crisis--including divorce. During the three crucial years, divorce affects children of different ages in different ways. Toddlers and young children are developing differently and so will react differently to divorce than older children or adolescents. In order to ease a child's transition, parents need to understand the developmental pace of their children, to recognize early signs of trouble, and to know how to intervene.

Critical Developmental Tasks
As a parent facing divorce one of your major fears about divorce no doubt is that it will leave permanent emotional scars on your child (or children). Parents worry that it will lower their children's self esteem, that they will feel unloved, that they will lose motivation to succeed in school, or that their idea of what it's like to have a family will be irrevocably stained. All of these fears are normal and understandable-- but they are not inevitable outcomes of divorce.

In order to provide divorcing parents with a developmental "road map that they can use to understand where the potholes may be and help their children avoid them, I have defined the critical developmental tasks facing children of different ages. Armed with this knowledge, along with information of what to look out for during the three critical years, and how they can successfully intervene if necessary, parents can see to it that their children become the one if four who may be damaged by divorce.
Briefly, these are those key developmental tasks:

Early Childhood
The most important tasks facing children from infancy to age five or so are the development of secure attachments and willingness to explore the world around them. These are related to the extent that secure attachments--to parents and other caretakers--form the foundation that allows for exploration and learning. Divorcing parents who have young children need to be sure that these children are able to form and maintain strong and stable attachments. If divorce stands in the way of this process, a child can effectively "stumble at the starting gate" of life.

Later Childhood
As children grow their primary developmental tasks shift somewhat, so that socialization and literacy become a major focus of their time and efforts. Schools play a major role in this, but so does the family. If divorce seriously disrupts a child's ability to form friendships and establish a place within a peer group, anxiety and withdrawal can be the result. Similarly, some children experience so much stress from divorce--particularly an acrimonious divorce, or one in which they are pressured to choose sides--that they are unable to focus on basic skills like reading. Research shows that children who fall seriously behind in these basic skills can have a hard time catching up and can in turn experience problems such as low self-esteem.

Adolescence
The primary developmental task in the years spanning from the "tween" years through adolescence is the emergence of a personal identity: that sense of:
· Who am I?
· What do I stand for?
· Why am I here (what are my options for the future)?

Once it crystallizes our identity can easily turn our life into a self-fulfilling prophecy. Identity emerges from the teen's relationships: with parents, peers, and other influential adults. If divorcing parents do not allow their divorce to cut off those important relationships a healthy identity can emerge. In contrast, I have seen instances when divorce effectively destroyed a parent-child relationship, with disastrous results.

The above a snapshot of the key issues that divorcing parents to be aware of. Children are hard-wired to face these developmental tasks. To the extent that they can facilitate their child's ability to do that-- and not undermine it--every child has the potential to emerge from divorce a healthy and more resilient individual.

Future blogs will look at each developmental stage in more detail. Or, for more information, see The Divorced Child: Strengthening Your Family through the First Three Years of Separation

 
 
 

Follow Joseph Nowinski, Ph.D. on Twitter: www.twitter.com/NewGrief

Most divorcing parents' greatest fear is the effect it will have on their children. These fears have their origin in a time when divorce was a rare event. Fifty years ago, children from divorced paren...
Most divorcing parents' greatest fear is the effect it will have on their children. These fears have their origin in a time when divorce was a rare event. Fifty years ago, children from divorced paren...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 210
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
05:47 PM on 07/01/2011
Much passionate dialogue here! Again, I want to emphasize that the purpose of this blog is to advocate for children whose parents are divorcing. Regardless of whether you are pro- or anti-divorce per se, such children exist. The question, for me, then becomes: How can we minimize the risk to these children from a developmental perspective? We can argue about percentages, but we still need to face the reality that research does indicate that not ALL children are permanently damaged by divorce. So what are the differences between those who are and those who aren't? And what can divorcing parents do to help their children survive divorce? In this regard the issue of attachment is an important one. Developmental psychologists beginnin with John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth found that while infants tend to form a "primary" attachment they also are capable of forming many other attachments. Caretaking, communication, and comforting appear to facilitate attachment. In today's world this means that children can form attachments not only to both parents but to other caretakers such as grandparents, nannies, and daycare workers. Divorcing parents need to protect and facilitate their children's attachments, as these play a critical role in early development. They also need to be sensitive to the potential negative effects of "broken" attachments": to family members, childcare workers, etc. I will do a separate blog on this at a later date.
06:55 PM on 06/30/2011
Dear Dr. Nowinski:

Are children invevitably damaged when one parent whom the child has formed an attachment is marginalized or denied access by an overzealous custodial gatekeeper regardless of parental rights but from a child developmental perspective. Basically, do you believe in the view that the child forms a single primary attachment with one parent or the view that the child forms a primary attachment with both parents?
09:41 PM on 06/27/2011
Better alone than in bad company. While divorce is painful...it has to be more damaging for children to grow up in a home where the parents no longer love and each respect other and stay together for the sake of the kids and money.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aerosol
04:41 PM on 06/29/2011
Why are people so near sighted?

During a divorce both parents are miserable. Usually at least one of them remains that way for years, if not forever.

So not only does the child continues in an unhappy home but the child usually has to deal with the unhappy parent(s) by himself because the other adult isn't there to protect him/her.

Usually at least one parent remarries and, statistically speaking, the chances that the second marriage will last is worse than the first marriage for this parent. Almost always the step parent blames the child for the problems in the marriage.

How does this improve things for the child? I mean, I get it that parents have to divorce for whatever reason but this shouldn't let people off the hook for looking at what really happens.
08:28 PM on 06/30/2011
I am only trying to point out that where marriages become abusive, whether it be drugs, alcohol, an abusive spouse (verbal, infidelity, physical), etc., that divorce is the best option and in the best interest of the child, provided I agree, one parent, places priority on the healthy mind of their children. If priority is placed on the children, getting remarried would not be considered. The priority being the children first, second and third.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aerosol
01:29 AM on 06/26/2011
Isn't it funny how people will stay together for the money way before they'll think about staying together for the kids? Since this is the huffington post I assume we are mostly nouveau riche housewives who do lunch a lot, n'est pas? We give the children their pills and we trust that the rest is up to them.
06:36 PM on 06/24/2011
Hello Briann. There is a growing body of solid longitudinal research comparing children of divorce to their non-divorced peers, and indeed it does challenge stereotypes. Not that these children are risk-free, because they are--just not as much as we may have thought. For starters, Google E. Mavis Hetherington and look at that work. Personally I could not agree more with Frankl's comment. That is surely true for me. The fact is, though, that divorces happen, and given that reality "the next best thing" is to provide parents with guidance as to how they can minimize its negative impacts. Much of that requires divorcing parents to focus on their children's developmental needs as opposed to their grievances with one another. Several commenters have spoken to this very passionately.
10:18 AM on 06/25/2011
Exactly. How can we entreat parents who are shrouded in their own pain and bitterness to throw that aside and focus on their children? Every kid in a counselor's office with behavioral issues or even minor learning disabilities, the professionals start out with: Divorce?

Articles that seem to state that a decent percentage of children of divorce will be fine or even stronger or more resilient are keen weapons for a parent who has no interest in attending to their child's developmental needs. And of a wife who could care about her husband's needs, do we think she will suddenly start to care about the kids' needs? As far as they can stay out of the counselor's office or special ed department at school. No question: getting their children to that 25% will make the hard work of letting go of resentment and grief look like a walk in the park.
Guest211
Stars Exploded to Make Me
10:00 AM on 06/26/2011
Dr Nowinski,

I'd be interested in hearing any novel approaches being taken by states, judges, etc which you were aware of.

Thanks
04:35 PM on 06/24/2011
I don't know why bloggers don't have to reference their research sources. 25% just seems questionable as a statistic. What are the parameters? Most of the current research does indicate that there are lots of different kinds of harm for the majority of children of divorce. Depending on the personality of the child, current attachment to both parents, the level of conflict in the home, amount of support, the list goes on and on about how each of these factors intersect.

The interesting point to me is that many propose that the answer to a happy, conflict-free life is to avoid marriage and children period. Yet, as Viktor Frankl taught us, love and family are the sustenance and meaning of life. So, I think the error of our judgement is not that we don't know how to do a happy divorce but that we except conflict-free relationships where our partner satistfies every need and provides us all our little hearts' desires. Adolescent mindset in terms of love and relationships is our bane. Until we leave these teenage dreams behind us and do the hard and long work of marriage (barring real abuse which somehow still needs to be said) and parenting -- most importantly the hard and sacrificing work of parenting -- will we continue to harm our children and our friends and families with our childish demands of what love and relationships should provide.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aerosol
04:58 PM on 06/24/2011
The 25 percent figure seems to show up a lot in studies. I agree it's strange.

Studies which ought to be linked to are Elizabeth Marquardt's book, just went blank on the title, "Between Two Worlds?". Also "The Love They Lost" by Stephanie Staal. Both of these writers/researchers are actual Children of Divorce who knew what kinds of questions to ask in the first place. These are very easy to read as well.

As far as happy conflict free life for the parents. You have to realize that parent-child relationships in divorce are completely different from relationships between parent-child in intact families. Often the relationship is much closer and honest. As social life and economic systems reduce they cling to each other in stress. This is often ideal for the parent who sees the child more as a friend, except that the parent is the dominant figure. Then when there is remarriage the child again goes through rejection and betrayal and demotion as he/she loses that closeness with the parent and once again has to adjust. Often there is trade off as once again the finances and social life can once again come into his life. And he has to do this in two different families at once. Amazing how this is ignored.
01:57 PM on 06/24/2011
There are a lot of really great posts on here but there are more narrow minded, depressed people on here. I truely feel sorry for those of you that think there is only one right way to do things. In my opinion (which everyone seems to have one) is that you must evaluate your personal situation and do what is best for YOU and YOUR KIDS. There cannot be one right answer and the rest are wrong. But the more narrow minded you are and unaccepting of differences in people and relationships the worse off you will be if the time ever comes for a divorce. Being open minded and able to make a commitment to your children is what will make them better people in the end, regardless of your marital situation. God Bless your children (lots of them will need it!)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aerosol
01:18 AM on 06/26/2011
Divorce usually sucks for one of the kids' parents. Divorce is a less than ideal homelike for the kids. People aren't depressed or narrow minded when they say that. They are usually just telling the truth.
photo
irishdoc
It's not me..it's you. Really
12:27 PM on 06/24/2011
As important as the question "Does divorce inevitable damage children", a more important question is, "Is splitting a child's home environment damaging" and if so how to we fix it. Although there are studies that show collaberative divorce with parents choosing a 50-50 custody situation is beneficial, it does appear that forced 50-50 parenting is what is damaging. Having to switch houses, friends, and rules on a weekly basis would send most adults into a tailspin, and yet we think nothing of expecting children to live this way. For the entirety of their childhood, we make them court ordered nomads and seem oblivious to the anger and loneliness that such a lifestyle inherently produces. When children say " I wish Mommy and Daddy were still together" we hear a longing for a two parent family, rather than a child saying " I'm tired of having to live in two separate places". And when they do clearly begin to Vote with Their Feet as adolescence and refuse to continue this nomadic lifestyle, some parents threaten jail for the other parent, get the police involved, or physically force the teen to go. Let's stop pretending that not being allowed to have a home, benefits children
09:41 AM on 06/26/2011
Sorry but research shows that children of divorce believe that equal placement time with each divorced parent is best for them. See W. Fabricius, "Listening to Children of Divorce: New Findings That Diverge From Wallerstei­­­n, Lewis, and Blakeslee"­­­, Family Relations at 385-96 (Vol. 52, October 2003).

It is interesting that a divorce-initiating spouse would not show such solicitude for the effects of the disintegrated home on the children before the divorce action is commenced. I take it that as long as the only effect of the divorce on the children is to take the divorcing dad out of the picture (or put his relationship with the children under her control), the divorcing mom is fine. If that doesn't happen, divorcing mom suddenly sees bad effects on the children? That doesn't have much logical consistency.

Children who live with each divorced parent on an equal basis manifest joy and eagerness and have the benefit of knowing/experiencing themselves as loved equally by both divorced parents.

In any event, my experience in divorce litigation teaches me that if a child ever would say what you claim ("I'm tired of having to live in two separate places.") there would be an eager divorcing/divorced mother to carry that input (back in)to the divorce court.

Divorcing moms apparently do not want the children to like equal placement time (and some may even behave in ways that make it challenging for the children and divorcing dads).

But children like equal placement time.
09:30 AM on 06/27/2011
I know only one example where equal placement was used. My next door neighbor - the husband left her with 4 kids (boys aged 10-14 and an 8 year old girl). He had a younger, very wealthy girlfriend. She had been a stay at home mom. He sprung this on her while she was on vacation visiting her mom.

He then took her to court to get 50/50 access to the kids - equal split time to the point he counted each hour of the week. He forced the entire family to go through psychological evaluations. The judge decided that at age 14 the kids could decide for themselves but under 14 they had to do it dad's way. The older boy never spoke to his father again. The younger kids each decided at age 14 to stop visiting him.

The 50/50 arrangement also worked for him because, although he had the career and the rich wife with the indoor swimming pool, he used the arrangement to cut off all child support to his ex wife. He was forced to pay her alimony for one year because she'd been a stay at home, then he was free. The family struggled along in poverty and had to sell the house, but he got his way. None of those kids will ever forgive their dad for what he did to their family. When his daughter got married recently, he wasn't there.
11:36 AM on 06/27/2011
Grinling Gibbons -

Please take a step back for a moment and look at how the divorce system (and the accompanying dialogue) works in the world of reality.

In the vast majority of cases, divorcing mom is going into the divorce expecting to get primary custody/placement of the children of the divorcing family -- to put divorcing dad out of the picture. And that is what actually happens in most cases.

Why? We know why -- and it isn't because "moms are better than dads" (no psychological science supports that conclusion ... and half of moms and half of dads are below average at parenting).

In no other parts of society is such blatant gender bias countenanced -- only in divorce court, where it gets combined with outdated notions of parental roles and speculation masquerading as applied expertise.

We are a better society than that.

Equality should be presumed in all parts of society, including equal time in the parenting of children of a divorcing family.

Equal unless there is an evidence-based reason for something other than equal.

Equal is what the children want in the vast majority of cases.

A bad/sad story about one case where there was equal placement doesn't change any of that. (There are far more bad/sad stories by children of divorce arising from the more common situation where divorcing mom has successfully pushed the divorcing dad out of the children's lives.)
Guest211
Stars Exploded to Make Me
02:41 PM on 06/27/2011
Doc, I appreciate your opinion but the literature concludes otherwise. Australia, at the request of the AG's office, completed one of the largest studies on Shared Parenting in May 2011.

"Overall, this research paints a positive picture of shared care in terms both of parental satisfacti­­on and children’s wellbeing.

Mothers’ reports on how well the arrangemen­­ts were working did not differ significan­­tly between those whose children were in shared care (66% working well) or spent most of their time with them (60.5%).

While the majority of parents report that their children are happy or very happy with the arrangemen­­t, the highest proportion is for those in a shared care arrangemen­­t with minor difference­­s between mothers and fathers.

Mothers reported that the children are equally happy in shared care and when they spend all (or nearly all) their time with them.

Even some mothers who resisted shared care were sanguine about it in hindsight.

In comparison with arrangemen­­ts where mothers are the primary carers, children are perceived by their parents to be doing relatively well in shared care where there are no concerns about the safety of the children or violence to the parent.

Overall children in shared care did not report that it was any easier or harder for them to get from place to another or to keep in contact with their friends or that it was more of a problem if they left things behind than it was for children living mostly with one parent."
photo
irishdoc
It's not me..it's you. Really
03:34 PM on 06/27/2011
Children's voices from the Australian study regarding visitation in high conflict cases
Children’s and young people’s responses to these fights and arguments were similar to those 
reported for before the separation, though 39% of respondents (23 of 59) reported that they ‘cried a 
lot.’ They also reported running away, calling Kids Helpline, and sitting and watching the fights while 
doing nothing. Qualitative responses supported these actions but included further information 
about how the children reacted to the fights. Three of 22 respondents (13.6%) reported running 
away when the fights began, mainly because ‘I didn’t want to go with my dad’. Three others watched 
the fights without intervening. This seemed to be due to the timing of the fights: ‘fights were 
normally when I was picked up or dropped off from Mum’s’, so children may have been either sitting 
in a car at the time or walking into the house. Two of the 22 children (9%) appeared to feel helpless 
to do anything about their situation, blaming it on the courts: ‘I told the judge I want my dad but  he 
won’t listen’;  ‘I now know I was forced to go [with Dad] because of the court’. These reports suggest 
that children and young people continued to feel helpless after their parents separated.  
photo
irishdoc
It's not me..it's you. Really
03:43 PM on 06/27/2011
Family voices from Australian study

The women spoke of years of their own exhaustion, of their high anxiety levels, of 
their fear and of the longterm psychological problems for their children. As one mother reported, the children don’t sleep well ... they now accept his violence as normal but they are always afraid he 
will come over and kill us’. Some three quarters of these women spoke of great fear, in particular that they and or their children would be killed by their former partner. They said things like ‘I fear for my life and for my daughter’s life’, ‘I fear for my daughter’s life’, ‘I live in fear’ and ‘I am surprised every day that we are still alive’. These women spoke of former partners who were extremely violent, who had criminal histories for violence, and who had substance abuse problems. For some women the continued substance abuse meant their male partners drifted away and ceased the connection and for this they were grateful. A typical comment was ‘I now have sole care of my children due to his drug use and consequent absence’. The most difficult position for this group of women was when their children were young, from 0 to 12, for, as the children became older, they responded to the direct abuse of themselves by cutting their ties with their father regardless of  court orders and parenting agreements.  
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Feminism is dead
It's true.
04:24 AM on 06/24/2011
Of course not, children aren't people! Why would they have an emotional reaction or scarring to a separation from a loved one, new strangers being forced into their lives by mom or dad's romantic pursuits, having to spend the majority of time driving back and forth between visiting their parents who used to live together until they screamed and yelled every night while their kids were sleeping or doing homework?

Real people would be able to control the circumstances they were under. Children appearing to be isolated or alone after their parents split up, are merely being tough! Yeah! They have no repressed feelings or emotions that won't be affiliated the lack of communication and happiness being presented in their formerly bright and cheerful existences!

I mean comon, if children were really being considered, or really had any say in divorce, parents probably wouldn't. Why do you think nobody has cared for so long? If parents want to get divorced, they will, because it's about them. Kids are just another thing they have to declare when they meet with an attorney.

The doctor writing this ad, should just change the title to "Do kids matter at all? 85% of modified and underrepresented statistics say no.'

Are they just handing out doctorates now? Can I find one in a Skill Crane machine or in a Cracker Jack box somewhere? Good god.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:18 AM on 06/24/2011
Are you going to stay at the miserable job the rest of your life b/c when you got hired it paid well? I'm sorry but I find it hard to believe that someone is going to ask their 4 year old how they should handle the situation. They aren't equipped to do so. Children are virtually 100% egocentric (that's a word I got from cracker jack box), all they know is how the world is and how it affects them.
At any rate, divorces aren't the ideal situation. They aren't awesome for kids. In some cases, they're not the right thing to do (particularly if not all avenues have been explored to save the marriage). I haven't read everyones comments below, but what I wish they and hte article itself would discuss is that much of childrens ability to survive the divorce process has to do with how well the divorcing couple can put their differences aside and actually "co-parent" their child. If they can't, remain bitter and angry, use the child as a conduit of hate-speak to the other parent, then, yes, troubles are coming. Why aren't people railing against the adults who aren't able to put things aside for the sake of their children rather than railing against divorce in general. Those are the real offenders of children potentials.
01:49 PM on 06/26/2011
"Why aren't people railing against the adults who aren't able to put things aside for the sake of their children rather than railing against divorce in general."

Exactly.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:19 AM on 06/24/2011
As with everything in life, real color happen in the area between the two extremes. In this case, divorce is abusive to kids vs. everyone should get a divorce whenever they want overlooks the real world of human relationships and interaction.
Staying together for the sake of the children sounds simple on the surface, but every decision has consequences. If you are in a hateful, loveless, even abusive relationship and you stay in it, that is the example of what marriage is supposed to be like for your child. They absorb this like sponges and are much more likely to repeat that cycle. Why would you want that? Bottom line is that the world is a difficult place. Hurt, pain, betrayal, abuses happen. we all have resentments, "baggage", etc. No way around that. A parent makes 100 decisions every day that affect the well being of their child. Some are more impact than others. Loving parents will make that decision with their children in mind and will be there to help support their child through it. Well, I have to go back to the crane machine and try for my next PhD. I'm hoping for something in Physics or Underwater Basket Weaving instead of the one I have in Marriage and Family Therapy.
01:28 AM on 06/24/2011
Stuff the author probably knows but doesn't fit into his message of, "Divorce is ok -- really. Let's not work on preventing it for the sake of the kids.":
http://www.divorcereform.info/index.php/2011061666/Resources-and-Information/talking-points.html

It does serious damage to a lot more than to 15%. That line is blatantly dishonest. Divorce does serious damage to the vast majority of kids who experience it.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aerosol
05:08 PM on 06/24/2011
I don't know if it really damages the kids because so many are actually better people than folks who grew up in Intact homes. The ones who thrive are the ones who are either extremely extroverted or who can get ahead in life by not making waves.
06:14 PM on 06/22/2011
Good for you, Hope. Rock on! You may find my next blog of interest.
Some readers seem to have interpreted this piece as arguing that children actually like divorce--that it's so good for them that more parents should do it. This reminds me of a comment that a client's mother made to her: "If you're going to get a divorce do it before things get really bad." My reply was that, using that logic, we should all get divorced right after we get married. It is rare to find a child or adult who says they liked their parents' divorce (though there are a few). I am not an advocate of divorce--I am an advocate for children. What professionals like me strive to do is to help parents who are divorcing see to it that their child does not become the one in four who suffers serious damage. In a similar vein we strive to help non-divorcing parents of children see to it that their child is not one of the 15% who experience serious problems. The new, better research on the effects of divorce should not be interpreted as advovating divorce but rather as suggesting that divorcing parents need no merely throw up their hands and expect th worst. Thanks to all who commented--even those who strongly disagree. The conversation is what counts.
09:08 PM on 06/22/2011
If you truly are an advocate for children, you would be striving to reduce divorce. Well done scientific studies are quite clear on the harm divorce causes to children. Statistically, the only time divorce might not be harmful is if the children are in a home with violence or threats of violence.

All you "therapists" who maintain a "divorce neutral" attitude are doing the equivalent of maintaining a neutral attitude on the question of whether or not the earth is flat. It's not ok to be neutral when one outcome is definitely more harmful to children.

You could be striving to try to help parents reconcile to help their children -- and most of the time that would help the children the most. Of course, that would destroy your whole business model.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aerosol
01:14 AM on 06/23/2011
Yeah. You're right it's very rare that a kid likes the parents' divorce. And the ones who say they do generally ape their parents' relationship mistakes as adults. They get married at the same age, have kids at the same age, get divorced at the same age as the parents. They don't develop as individuals at all, but they do tell everyone that they didn't mind the divorce. And amongst divorced parents the kid who says that gets a lot of brownie points.
12:31 PM on 06/22/2011
I'd say that overall this is a pretty good article but to imply that divorce can even be good for a child is a stretch. It is like saying "being in an auto accident can make children more alert when driving". It may be true but the risks (even at 25%) are not worth it. The complexities of offsite parents, step parents, child support, visitation and such are mind boggling and are a major drain on effective parenting which even without divorce is not a job for the squeamish.
10:50 AM on 06/22/2011
Children don't need to be worried about when it comes to parents and splitsville. They learn from experience and friends how to work both sides of the equation against the middle and milk concessions and goodies from both ends of the spectrum. Pitting each parent against the other as being more loving and generous is a really ancient children's party game and can be worked easier than an ATM machine.
10:19 AM on 06/22/2011
This doctor needs someone to edit his blog:
"Armed with this knowledge, along with information of what to look out for during the three critical years, and how they can successfully intervene if necessary, parents can see to it that their children become the one if four who may be damaged by divorce." - I'm certain this is not what he meant to say. My suspicion is that it should have read: "Armed with this knowledge, ... parents can see to it that their children don't become the one in four who may be damaged by divorce."
Also, "The above a snapshot of the key issues that divorcing parents to be aware of." would make more sense with "is" and "need" added to make a proper sentence.
Should you wish to hire an editor, I'm available...
06:51 AM on 06/22/2011
After many, many years of the highly flawed Wallerstein studies being taken as gospel, I'm very relieved that a proper longitudinal study, with controls, has been done. I'm a child of divorce who feels that divorce was good for my family in all ways except for financial--and it was a low-conflict divorce. My parents had no models to work from (they divorced in the 70s when the whole concept was very new to many middle class people) but seemed to have intuited the rule book for how to behave. It bothers me that parents who are under great emotional stress might experience even worse stress because they mistakenly think the choice to divorce is automatically going to damage their children permanently. I'm all for a strong effort to educate people from an early age on collaborative communication and emotional self-regulation to help them have better relationships, but sometimes, divorce is the right choice for the family. I'll be curious to read Dr. Nowinski's future blogs because if we can start with the idea that divorce happens, we can help parents and kids get through it with less trauma.

http://www.nancypeske.com