There is no aspect of marriage, and for that matter divorce, that engenders more potential emotional or financial mayhem than children and the issues of child custody. I certainly appreciate that any normal parent loves their child, wholly and unconditionally, and typically wants to spend as much time as possible with them. The responsibilities attendant to being a "good" parent can be daunting to most couples. The prospect of facing those responsibilities alone are even more terrifying.
It always amazes me to see how two people that created a child out of love can become so embittered and hateful to each other such that the welfare of their own children would become secondary to their own happiness, usually out of retribution to their former spouse. Custody litigation is the pinnacle in the battle of the divorce war, and more frequently than not, it leaves the children permanently injured with the shrapnel of the battle.
Is it better to endure an unhappy marriage for the sake of the children? I am a firm believer that it is not. If you are miserable and unhappy, your children will be too. Children, even very young ones, are incredibly perceptive. They can sense an atmosphere of trust and love, and have the equivalent emotional radar when it comes to unhappiness and hostility. You may think you are fooling your kids, but they know when Mom and Dad are really happy, and when they are really not.
While this may be a sad statement about the status of our marital society, it is also a stark statement about the reality of life in America today. People get married, have kids, and get divorced. It is all part of the American Dream -- I mean the American reality. There is no longer the divorce stigma -- "Don't play with Anne's kids, she is going through a divorce." Instead, divorce is just another step in the modern maze of our lives.
There are a few basic options you may have should your family become divided. First, and by far the best way to handle this incredibly difficult situation is to reach agreement with your spouse about the parenting plan you will have for the children. Depending on your circumstances, this plan can be regimented and detailed or open and ambiguous. The key is to simply reach a mutually acceptable plan as fast as humanly possible.
Second, you can decide to file a custody action as part of your divorce and ask the court to decide all of the details concerning the arrangements pertaining to your children. If you elect for this alternative, you will be relegating yourself to a process that was not in any respect designed to protect you or your children from harm. While the court is always supposed to act in the "best interests of the child", the other litigant (your soon to be ex-spouse) and his or her lawyer are not so obligated. Neither are the therapists that you and your spouse may retain, the expert witnesses, the in-laws, Pastor, co-workers, lovers, ex-spouses, neighbors, friends and former friends. And trust me, everyone will have something to say.
Third, you might engage in what is known as an alternative dispute resolution process, or mediation. In many instances, your participation in this process may actually be judicially mandated.
Mediation remains a process of conciliation. It is designed to reach an agreement as opposed to just a decision. A good arbitrator is not necessarily a good mediator and that distinction is critical to the success of the process. Just as you are charged with undertaking a degree of due diligence with respect to the selection of your lawyer, the same responsibility is incumbent upon both you and your lawyer when deciding to involve an independent party to help you resolve or decide the welfare of your children.
Unfortunately, some people hate each other so much or are so mentally imbalanced that they drive Judges crazy. These same individuals are also the ones that use the children as economic leverage. It is in essence the ultimate blackmail -- give me this or I'll take the kids. For them, it is all about the money, and the children are only a convenient means to accomplish an economic objective.
You must always be cognizant of the shock and pain a divorce causes a child, and you must place their interest in the forefront. The pain and agony of divorce is often seen most vividly in the hearts and eyes of your own children. Custody litigation frequently destroys young lives rather than protecting them from the parents that are supposed to love them.
Follow Mark A. Barondess on Twitter: www.twitter.com/markabarondess
How about when you have children, your life ENDS. You and your partner become the means by which they grow up to become rational, responsible adults without drug habits, clear heels, or vandalism records.
Anyone who divorces after children have entered the relationship are irrational and selfish people, thinking more about themselves than the lives they chose to bring on to this planet. Period.
Mentally, emotionally and physically healthy parents are better parents.
Ignoring the needs of adults in crisis by lecturing them to put their kids first is an artifical practice.
Every parent has needs and dreams, and when those are seriously considered, then so can the children's best interests be served.
Calling parents "selfish" is way off the mark; it just causes them to dig their heels in further because their needs aren't being met.
Mediation can be extraordinary, when it's appropriate and when the mediator is highly-skilled.
First, the evidence contradicts the writer's stated belief that kids benefit when parents divorce for no other reason that they think they'd be happier divorced. Research studies consistently find that, except in high-conflict marriages involving violence or frequent intense verbal arguing, it's best for children if parents stay together. Either he doesn't know this, or he doesn't care. Either way, it's hard to take him seriously after he makes this statement.
This does not mean parents have to stay together. But people need to know that if they split up for no other reason than that they think they'd be happier divorced, they are greatly increasing kids' exposure to serious, life-altering problems. If that's okay with parents, they have the right to seek divorce. But let's not give them bad information to guide their decisions, okay?
Second, he, like almost all writers on divorce, ignores the fact that virtually all conflict over custody is between fathers seeking not to be forced to the margins of their children's lives, and mothers determined to do just that.
The reality about divorce is that most damage to kids is done by mothers, who initiate most divorces, typically in their personal search for happiness, then choose to keep fathers out of kids' lives. Why don't we as a society acknowledge this? Who benefits from the silence?
Why is that?
Why do you believe what you believe?
Within psychotherapy, you will encounter many clients who grew up in married households and truly struggle because of the household they grew up in. Even if a parent loves their child, if they created a hostile environment with tension, then everyone who lives in that household experiences that hostility. The simple and innate cause of such tensions can be derived from something so simple as living with a person who doesn't make each other happy. Both parents are human. They experience human emotions and despite the best efforts, these feelings cannot be completely concealed and they cannot be kept separate from their living situation. Even the best intentions from the parents may unintentionally take their dysfunctional relationships out on the child. Through the experiences and perspective of the child, the parents have set the foundations for their children, which determines how they will; grow, mature, and handle any interpersonal socialization throughout their entire life.
Is there something confusing about this statement? I'm saying that when researchers study the effects of divorce on children, they find that children of divorced parents tend to do worse after the divorce, except in the case of of high-conflict marriages, when they tend to do better. I'm saying that no matter what you theorize about the effects of an unhappy parent on children, the evidence says that having unhappily married parents, absent high levels of conflict, is not as powerfully negative as the effects of a divorce on children. Is this clear?
Do you need a citation? Here's one of many:
(From abstract) “We find that separation and divorce are associated with increases in behavior problems in children, regardless of the level of conflict between parents. However, in marriages that do not break up, high levels of marital conflict are associated with even greater increases in children's behavior problems.”
Morrison D, Coiro M. Parental Conflict and Marital Disruption: Do Children Benefit When High-Conflict Marriages Are Dissolved? Journal Of Marriage & Family. August 1999;61(3):626-637.
Does similar evidence support your contentions? Or are you just repeating bad information?
Divorce courts should get out of and put divorce lawyers out of the business of child custody determinations.
Divorce is not the time and divorce court is not the place and divorce lawyers are not the people for family social work.
No child psychologist can testify with scientific certainty that a child will be better/worse off by spending 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 or 9 overnights every two weeks with one parent rather than the other parent after a divorce. It is pure speculation.
But it is a guarantee that the children of the divorcing household will be worse off if divorce lawyers are able to profiteer by staging a child custody dispute that is paid for financially/emotionally by the divorcing household.
Divorce lawyers (who are not child experts) should not be able to bleed divorcing households of resources that could be maintained for the children of the divorcing household -- for counseling, orthodonitia, school expenses, sports/recreation, books, activities, college savings.
Presumed equal parenting time of children in divorce is best for children not because equal time works in all cases for all children but because custody disputes work in no cases for no children.
Downsize the divorce industry. Invest resources into helping divorced spouses succeed as co-equal parents.
Put aside the divorces in marriages with no children.
Bad divorce policy and bad divorce law/precedent drive bad outcomes for children.
Divorce gives a woman the opportunity to take essentially complete control of the children and to use the children as a means to collect substantial payments from the father.
Why is it a "custody battle" when a father wants EQUAL parenting time with his children?
Time to reframe.
Certainly this might be true in a high conflict marriage (abuse, alcohol/drug abuse, mental illness) but only around 5% of divorces fall into this category. Women initiate about 75% of divorces, however, the main reasons they give are: boredom, loss of affection, unhappiness. So quite often mom divorces, splits up the family, and she's happier - but everyone else is miserable.
I call that selfish.
The trouble is, kids with both parents statistically do better than the kids from divorced families. Most kids whose parents divorce spend years, if not decades, wishing their parents would magically get back together. And divorced fathers are usually marginalized by severely limited visitation schedules, thus the relationship they have with the kids is dramatically changed.
If you really want to give your kids the best shot at life, and you are not in a high conflict marriage, then stay married! Yes, it's a lot of hard work, and it may never be perfect (what is?), but if you spend half the effort fixing up your current marriage rather then leaving for 'greener grass', your kids will surely do better.
And once the kids are gone, then feel free to divorce if you so choose.
I do agree with your main point tho, that divorce is bad for kids. Don't be selfish, find a way to make it work, you were once in love with the other person or should have been, put your kids first and yes...when they are grown, divorce then, if you like.
I picked on females since they file the majority of divorces, often for somewhat nebulous reasons, but recognize many males deserve to be divorced - or do the divorcing themselves.
Both men and women are flawed, certainly, Both dogs and horses have four feet. Both water and gasoline are liquid at room temperature.
But none of these facts is relevant to the fact that women primarily drive divorce, they primarily drive it in pursuit of their personal emotional fulfillment, and they primarily drive it to the detriment of children, fathers and everyone else involved.
Divorce is not gender-neutral and that is not just IMO. It's profoundly gender-lopsided from start to finish. How are we going to remove the gender bias when we pretend that it doesn't exist? I guess we aren't.