In my first blog in this series I described research which shows that divorce is not inevitably damaging to children. Indeed, ongoing research continues to support the contention that, overall, children from divorced families are not significantly worse off, psychologically, than their peers from intact families. That said, it is also true that children of divorce express feelings of distress and are bothered by bad memories for years after their parents' divorce.
Researchers who surveyed college students whose parents had divorced ten years earlier, as well as a group of non-college same-age children of divorce, found that these young men and women continued to report significant feelings of distress related to the divorce. Most often cited was the relative loss of their relationships with their fathers, along with lingering distress associated with intense and ongoing parental conflict.
Another study of young adults whose parents had divorced found evidence suggestive of why distress may linger. Many of those surveyed stated that they felt a loss of control over their lives as a consequence of the divorce. Less that 20% said that both of their parents had talked to them in advance of the divorce (as opposed to being told only after legal action had been taken), and only 5% reported that they had ever been given an opportunity to ask questions about the divorce. Such lack of communication clearly can create feelings of anxiety and helplessness.
In the study cited above, those few children who reported that they were able to talk to their parents and ask questions about the divorce had less painful memories and more positive attitudes about their parents' divorce. The implication is clear: children are better off when they are not kept in the dark about their parents divorce. That leads us to the logical question: What do children need to know, and how much say should they have? Here are some suggestions:
Under which circumstances do you think this girl would be likely to look back, ten years later, on her parents' divorce with less distress and better memories: If her wishes were heard and accommodated, or if she had been forced into some shared parenting arrangement in which she moved from place to place in the midst of her cheerleading activity? Which is the more loving choice for both parents to make?
The past two decades or so have seen many fathers becoming more actively involved in day to day parenting -- what I call the "grunt work" of parenting as opposed to just the fun part of parenting. This change bodes well for meaningful co-parenting and can go a long way toward moderating the feeling of loss of a father-child relationship that once was commonly associated with divorce. At the same time, rigid co-parenting arrangements that do not take a child's opinions into account likely contribute to the feelings of loss of control, helplessness, and anger that linger for many children of divorce for years afterward.
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
Steve Grissom
Founder
DivorceCare
(Note: DC4K is a companion to the adult DivorceCare program, and the two programs are designed to work together in a way that promotes family healing.
In contrast to the divorce proceedings, the shared custody arrangement has been a model of cooperation. I lay the blame for the divorce conflict on external sources.
Although it is admirable that fathers are trying to co-parent more, why aren't more people studying what that entails for the normal child of divorce. What is it like when both parents show up at a doctor's visit and can't agree that a problem exists or what the appropriate treatment is. What lessens do they learn from living a nomadic lifestyle, and how does this translate into how they manage adult lives? What percentage of children who are in rigid co-parenting situations opt out of one or both parent's life when they reach 18? In order to do effective research, how do we tease out the effects of divorce versus the effects of various visitation schedules?
William Fabricius, "Listening to Children of Divorce: New Findings That Diverge From WallersteiÂÂn, Lewis, and Blakeslee"ÂÂ, Family Relations, Volume 52, Issue 4, pages 385–396, October 2003;
http://onlÂÂinelibrarÂyÂ.wiley.cÂomÂ/doi/10Â.11Â11/j.1Â741-Â3729.Â2003.Â0038Â5.x/abÂstrÂact
Look, we both know there are fanatics on both sides. I don't want those opinions. I just want to hear from actual children involved.
I agree that co-parenting works in families who chose it as an option and work to make it happen. These are also the people who are least likely to have conflict and most likely to have flexibility in their parenting agreements.
But this is not the majority of situations that the children are in. Most children are in situations in which one parent is court ordered to co parent despite their objections, and changes to the plan require multiple court visits.
if most children are so happy with the plan, then why, when they reach the age of majority, do the reject 50-50 placement? And why are we so afraid to give them a seat at the table when it comes to deciding custody?
I am an advocate for children, not an advocate of divorce. Since divorce remains a reality for nearly half of our children the next best thing for me to do is to share information about how best to help children emerge from divorce without severe emotional or academic handicaps. Simply including them in the conversation is one of those ways.
Thanks to all who've joined the conversation.
I hope it gets better for you.
The Holidays are hard for me.
That's what we said, it didn't work out, but now he wants to know what didn't work. I know he doesn't understand.
I try to hide it but sometimes I get a little emotional when I have to drop him home on Sunday nights because I only see him every other weekend and I know I won't see him a another week. I'm getting better though.
You can make use of the experience in coaching your son to understand that people like yourself can go through rejection but can come through better and wiser than before. And, also, that his Mother is struggling to overcome the oppression that society puts down women with, and this may not end up well for her, but her struggle is to be admired. And, also, that he is free to develop his own attitudes and feelings which are apart from his parents' relationship. And, also, just let him have a carefree childhood for as long as possible. Hope that helps. Sorry it sounds nuts, but everything the shrinks say is so stupid I may as well chime in.
A more realistic goal would be to help them get through the painful transition.
2) Know how it will effect you: Your life will completely change: 1 of your 2 homes will be your home with dad whrere it will feel like, and legally be called 'visits', 4 days a month". You are very possibly more likely to think divorce is cool when you grow up, effecting your children the same way, and their children, and so on. You are 2-6 times more likely to have various problems such as depression suffer abuse drug alchohol, suicide thoughts poor conflict resolution skills narcissism your educational opportunities may suffer due to Mom's desire to destroy your 1 biological family, and you will likely, as Mom knows because that's why she filed (needs to find HERSELF) miss out on your loving (only) biological Dad being there most the way, as Mom will not settle on 50/50 because she doesnt 'have to'.
3) Even though you don't generally wish for all this, in whatever happens hereafter, a 'replacement for your (only biological) Dad', finances that effect so much of your life chances, your living every day with out 1 of your parents, as to 'consideration of your wishes"?. Mom says and lives like your wishes don't matter.
Or as another poster alluded, alternately, lets teach 'em young to live in denial and narcissim.
To put it another way, the primary cause of stepparents is birth mothers.
However, in general...very important...in general (not in your specific case) women are treating marriage like Kleenex...it is great until it is used and then it can be thrown away just as easy. I believe what most men on here are trying to point out is that when they said, 'till death do us part' and 'for better or for worse' they actually meant it.
If you don't agree with those commitments, wouldn't you agree there needs to be a wholesale change in the marriage process? Or at the very least, those phrases should be changed to, "Till I don't like you anymore" and "for better or until I'm depressed and don't want to deal with this marriage anymore."?
So, call me cynical, but all three bullet points were meaningless to the end of my marriage. She left. I was standing there holding the pieces. The kids were affected. We were all devastated. It was what it was. There was no way to "minimize" it other than try my best for the kids.
Or they describe it as though it were a mutual decision the couple arrived at together, like picking a vacation spot: "They got divorced."
Far more often, however, one spouse primarily initiates the divorce with the being less supportive or even actively opposed. "She sued him for divorce, had him evicted from his home and separated from his children and forced him to pay her a third of his income for the next 10 years."
Actually, the typical family divorce story goes like this: "Nobody wanted divorce except Mom. She got it. She's happier and healthier. Everybody else isn't."
Somehow you never see that story in print, however. It's weird. The Hollywood cliche of the dad who spends too much time working and neglects his family, only to repent in the end and fade out surrounded by beaming wife and frolicking kids is a movie standard. But I don't recall a single film about a mom who splits up the family in her quest for an idealized vision of romantic love, but eventually realizes that maybe it wasn't such a smart, brave, admirable move and, in fact, screwed up everybody else's life royally. I wonder why?
Both parents generally love their kids. It is blatantly unfair to suggest that requesting divorce is an act of hate towards one's children.
Others encountered include the plain denial stating that women don't drive divorce for personal reasons, the mystery denial that says that we just don't know what is going on with divorce, the just-desserts denial that says the guys had it coming, the it-hurts-me-more-than-it-hurts-you denial and, finally, the unspeakable denial which holds that it's just too horrible or, specifically in this case, "unfair" to tell the truth.
When it comes to women and divorce, denial is definitely a river in Egypt.
Look, why not just bow to the well-established facts? Then we can perhaps come up with some ways to make things better that don't involve punishing women, fear of which I suppose is at the root of these energetically squirming denials.
Can't anybody think of ways that could potentially reduce the incidence and impact of divorce without punishing women? I sure can. It's easy once you face the facts and start trying to deal with them rather than deny them.
And please, don't come at me with the 5% of the time minority instances, and then apply it to the majority, that force divorce.
Sure, divorce is not the only factor in influencing how children develop into successful adults. That's obvious. But it's equally obvious that it's one of the most important.
As a general rule, all factors being equal, divorce is more likely to harm children than not.
Of course, all factors are probably not equal in the real world. So if all divorces occur optimally, the damage on children is likely to be lessened or even absent in a larger number of cases. And if all intact marriages are maximally bad, then divorce may be a better option for the children's interests.
However, this really doesn't move us very far from the starting contention, which is that divorce is generally, significantly, long-lastingly negative for children. You don't have to bend over very far, or discount much evidence, to reach that conclusion.
I get the feeling I may even be taking what you're saying the wrong way. I'm assuming your being ironic, but I could be wrong about that.
And from the kids' point of view, unless the home is truly awful, they are not going to see it as a good thing.