Sharing Parents
By Ron Thow
While society may find it hard to let go of the idea that separation automatically leads to a single mum-deadbeat dad setup, the reality looks very different – writes Ron Thow.
When my own relationship with my son’s mother ended there was the usual raft of emotions. Anger, hurt, betrayal, guilt and failure; rightly or wrongly we both felt them all at different times. Simply being in the same room was uncomfortable and any conversation was stilted and wooden.
Ironically enough, perhaps our saving grace at that time was that we weren’t great arguers.
Instead we bothretreated to ourselves. This meant that there were fewer harsh and angry words in the air between us than in many other separations and once said those words can never be recalled.
The other main factor is that we were both deeply in love with our son and at a time when we couldn’t talk about ourselves we were able to talk about him. We both also wanted to be active in raising him. For me personally the idea of every second weekend visits was something that would never be acceptable.
Gradually and with many, many false starts and setbacks we found ways to make it work as a parenting team. We slowly created communication and trust where there was none.
We have weathered the arrival of new partners and the changes they bring. We have tested each other to new limits of tolerance and set records in forgiveness. All so that we can raise our son together. Through him we are connected for life, so we might as well work together rather than against each other.
Strangely enough, as a byproduct of our goals as parents we have become first unlikely allies and finally even friends.
I discovered that at our son’s Kindergarten, most of the parents think that we are still together which has amused us both.
My explanation to people who ask has always been world politics, even after generations as enemies Russia and the US have found mutual benefits in working together for common goals. Surely two people can manage to do what two nations do.
Two parents working together like we do after they separated is becoming known as “Shared Parenting”. It differs from other forms of custody in that it is based around the concept of both parents taking an active role in the raising of children. It is the product of a conscious decision by both former partners to actively participate in the child-rearing process – the closest approximation to the ‘2 parent family’ model that separated parents can achieve.
Shared (or joint) custody, on the other hand, revolves around both parents maintaining close contact
with the children and raising them as 2 single parents without necessarily working closely with each other. This is probably the most common form of custody.
It is often created when 2 parents wish to be involved in parenting their children, but are unable to communicate constructively with each other, for any of a variety of reasons.
Legal custody refers to the decision-making rights, responsibilities and authority over a minor child (over health, education, etc). Normally, unless the court has directed otherwise if both parents were living together at the time of the birth then both share legal custody.
Physical custody simply means the parent with whom the child normally resides all or most of the time. Typically, Child Support, for example, only recognises one parent as having physical custody. The other parent is liable for LPC (liable parent contribution) either directly to the other parent or through the IRD.
My own parents stayed together for years simply to raise their family. During that time they argued endlessly about anything, in any number of ways. Finally, when they parted they left an emotional minefield between them that they have never been able to defuse.
I know of other parents who have reached an ‘accord’ with each other. They lead essentially separate lives within their marriage, living together only to raise their children.
Whether it is better to be a child from an angry, separated family, or the child from a cold and undemonstrative complete one is a question to entertain only psychologists and sociologists.
For those of us who are members of such families the issues we consider are far more practical and everyday.
Most of the separated parents I know and there seem to be more all the time eventually find a working solution to the ongoing need to raise their children.
At least part of this is rooted in the practicalities of the situation, just as our decisions were. The reasons for a separation may not always be resolved but for many they become less emotional as the anger and pain of a breakup are diluted with time.
The day-to-day business of life also plays a role, the need to work together for discipline and education – simply making sure that children are transported from A to B, that school and sports events are seen and enjoyed. Holidays and trips away or weekend visits to Dad or Mum. All of these events, small in themselves can be huge problems if neither parent can communicate with the other.
One of the major factors that can make or break shared parenting is the financial pressure. The difficulties of raising children while trying to survive on a benefit or juggle part-time or full time work or disputes over child support payments. Often these pressures may have contributed to the original breakup of the relationship.
There are no magic solutions to these problems and the stresses they create. But it is vital to separate them from the relationship.
David, father of 4, says of his situation:
“We were just arguing al/ the time about money. It wasn’t until after we separated that the day to day facts of raising the kids became clear. Money had always been a problem and I guess that I hadn’t been as involved as I wanted to with the kids.
After we split up I knew I didn’t want to only be a part time Dad. So I cut back my hours at work and make sure that the times that I’m with the kids that they are my only focus instead of the old days when I fitted them around my work. Things are a lot different with the drop in income I have to say.
But I’ve decided that it’s worth it compared to the other option of only seeing the kids every few weeks or so.”
Paul has a more ‘traditional’ child-sharing arrangement with his ex for his two daughters, every second weekend and alternate Wednesday nights:
“It’s not my ideal situation, but I work full time and that’s important to me too. Without the income I earn I wouldn’t be able to support my family. Just because I don’t live with them full time doesn’t mean that my responsibilities have ended.”
With my own situation, I hadn’t really considered the mechanics of how we got to where we have, what the process actually was, before I started working on this article. Like Topsy our parenting relationship ‘ just grooved’.
As I mentioned earlier there was a great deal of luck and an amazing ability not to lose sight of the big picture – especially when one of us had managed to really infuriate the other by doing or saying the wrong thing.
Mostly at its core there was the conscious decision that our son was not a trophy.
That whatever problems existed between the two of us, at any given time, stayed between the two of us. Granted that was a stretch at times but we made it, more or less.
In the US, shared custody is now the default option in a number of states. As an option equally shared custody was virtually nonexistent in the 1970’s. By 1997 however it accounted for 22% of post-divorce arrangements at national level.
In some states it has grown to over 50%. This compares to 9% of father-only custody and 69% of mother-only custody.
Interestingly, states that have shared custody, such as Wisconsin, tend to also have a lower rate of formal divorce. Other major advantages appear to be the reduced costs to the legal system as the number of domestic court cases drop.
Much of the facts and figures now being generated in support of shared custody are rooted in the basic benefits to the children of continued active involvement by both parents.
Research indicates that children with continued access to both parents on a regular basis demonstrate reduced emotional trauma as a result of the parent’s separation and greater self-esteem. They also show greater ability to maintain their own relationships in later life.
In addition, there is an increasing body of research that indicates that fatherless children are forming a significant at risk group in many of the above areas. Given that ‘traditional’ custody arrangements tend towards reduced father/child contact the time has certainly arrived for some new options to be introduced into the ‘system’.
ACT MP Dr Muriel Newman’s “Shared Parenting Bill”, introduced to parliament in March this year, has been the subject of a number of articles in the news.
Sometimes these articles have focussed on the personal histories of abusive fathers and the benefits of preventing access by them to their children. Other themes cover the potential use of the Bill for ‘deadbeat parents’ (yes, they do come in both sexes) to avoid paying Child Support.
However, existing legislation covers such cases and in my opinion its effectiveness is in no way compromised by Newman’s bill.
It doesn’t do more than asking Family Court judges to consider shared parenting as the highest priority for their decisions, without in any way reducing their discretionary powers. In other words it is the starting point; if parents are separating and there are no other issues then shared custody is created by default.
If there are other issues then one or both of them continues the legal process to some other arrangement. The bill also provides some redress from false accusations of sexual or physical abuse although the $1000 fine appears minimal for anyone convicted.
The Bill has been criticised as being ‘naive’. This seems to be based on its presumption that two parents might care enough about their children to actually behave like adults for their children’s benefit.
The most likely effect of the bill in the medium term is to create more steps in a mind-shift from the default maternal – custody/visiting father system to a more balanced approach based on each situation. It may also serve to prompt the parents to consider other possible options.
While this i occurring naturally as society evolves the process is likely to be accelerated somewhat.
A gradual move to a more equitable custody environment and the promotion of the children’s rights and needs to have access to both parents, where practicable, can only benefit all involved parties in the long term.
