The swiftness with which Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise reached an agreement regarding the custody of their daughter has led many people to wonder about how it could happen so quickly and with such apparent ease. The reality is that most custody cases are resolved by agreement of the parents, as Tom and Katie's was. A study conducted by divrocepeers.com showed that 51 percent of custody arrangements are developed through consensus of parents. That study also indicated that only 4 percent of custody cases proceed to trial, with only 1.5 percent completing a full trial.
After practicing family law for nearly 25 years, I have found that, among my clients who are able to resolve custody swiftly and without a trial, five core tenants are usually present.
1) Serving the best interest of the children is paramount. These parents are willing, and often do, put what is best for their children above their own desires.
2) The parents respect and appreciate the significance and importance of the other parent in the children's lives. These parents do not contend that individually they can effectively take on the role of both mother and father. Nor do they think their co-parent can be easily replaced by a surrogate; stepparent, friend, relative.
3) They are invariably realistic and practical in their outcome expectations. These parents know that they must evenhandedly allocate parenting time with the children. Division of the family always results in division of time with the children. This premise also holds true for decision making.
4) These parents embody a spirit of cooperativeness. They are able to work together cooperatively to achieve an equitable, logistically practical and financially prudent agreement which ultimately serves the best interest of their children.
Assuming that these characteristics are present, how then can parents resolve their custody disputes quickly and amicably? Here are some things to consider:
1) Find general consensus as to what is in the child's best interest. Focus negotiations exclusively on serving those interests. The needs of the child are not inextricably intertwined with the desires of the parent. Often in child custody matters, the two are in direct dichotomy. The needs of the child must take precedence over the desires of the parent.
2) Be reasonable. The fastest way to thwart settlement negotiations and cause adverse feelings between parents is to unrelentingly hold onto unrealistic goals. Ask yourself a couple of questions. Are your demands reasonable and fair given the totality of circumstances? If your soon to be ex offered up the same scenario, what would your response be?
3) Attempting to renegotiate long-standing parenting agreements will invariably muddy the negotiation waters and jeopardize any chance of settlement. To a great extent, all couples have informally negotiated and agreed upon certain parenting issues -- observance of holidays, the children's schooling and extra-curricular activities. Making demands that are in opposition to such agreements will not fly in negotiations. Step back and consider what would have occurred if the family had remained intact.
4) Negotiate focusing on significant issues; do not waste time and effort arguing over the insignificant. Often with child custody negotiations and agreements, the devil is in the details. As children grow older, their needs change; incorporate some growth room into the agreement. The midweek transition parenting plan that worked well for a preschooler may conflict with the extracurricular schedule of a 7th grader.
5) Keep the focus on children. The purpose of child custody agreements is to develop a plan that will ensure that the needs of the child are met. Custody negotiations, and ultimately agreements, are not a healing mechanism or vehicle for revenge for the parents. There are more appropriate forums and venues to deal with the emotional impact and stress of separation and divorce.
Follow Laurie Giles on Twitter: www.twitter.com/lauriegwhatnow
Pray tell just why this is counselor. Could it possibly be that most men's family law attorneys routinely warn their clients that cases that go to court invariably do not end well for men, resulting in really inequitable custody percentages, and of course the man being required to pay his ex-wife's court costs. Nothing like incentive to make someting happen, right?
The doctor in the emergency room took pictures of my many bruises.
When we went to court, my ex claimed I kidnapped the unborn child. The judge laughed his head off and told my husband he was a jerk.
Then when my daughter was born, my ex was barred from seeing her. I let him see her once at the hospital, but then he tried to attack me so the police took him away.
We went back to court and I got custody. He had no visitation rights.
My second husband adopted my daughter. My ex wrote me a note saying he was adopting his girlfriend's child so he was glad to sign off.
He lost custody of his adopted daughter and the other daughter he created with his second wife when they divorced.
He is now on disability because he is bi-polar.
With all due respect, what does any of that have to do with how to settle a child custody issue in a divorce?
I told my divorce lawyer who immediately yelled "THAT WOULD PUT ME OUT OF BUSINESS!".
After the divorce went thru and I was forced to pay double full support to get joint custody, I told the psychologist (old dude) about the Shared Parenting bill, and he went from a deep authorative voice to a little boy who had discovered he wet his pants "OH NO, YOU'RE DIFFERENT. YOU REALLY CARE ABOUT YOUR DAUGHTER! BUT THEY CAN'T DO THAT!". This is the same dude that pounded me for being "too much of a parent".
It's all about the Benjamins to the Divorce Industry. Women have no idea what single fathers have gone through.
The men would give you anything you want to have you keep the children and not bother him with them.
Dont believe me just try it
I requested joint custody (two weeks with each parent) with both of us living in the same school district so that they wouldn't have to change schools, but she requested and got full custody.
My ex confessed years later when our son was in the hospital after a bad car wreck that the reason she wanted full custody was so that she could collect up to half my income as child support so that she wouldn't have to work.
It wasn't about the kids - it was about profiting from the divorce.
I'm sure there are THOUSANDS of cases where decisions have been postponed because the judge had a pressing golf game or some other equally important event. Never mind that the participants have to take off work and travel far to be there.