Thumbs up Research

I am constantly keeping my eye out for good solid research on the benefits of shared parenting and recently I found a gem of a paper written by Dr. Linda Nielsen.

Who is Dr. Linda Nielsen, you ask?  Well, she's the Professor of Education and Adolescent Psychology at Wake Forest University and just happens to be one of my new favorite people.

Dr. Nielsen has her very own website, which may not be fancy, but is easily navigated to buy her book, Between Fathers and Daughters, find helpful father friendly links and a great list of articles that she's written such as Demeaning, Demoralizing and Disenfranchising Divorced Dads or one that I'll definitely be digging into soon, Stepmothers:  Why so much stress?

But, the meat and potatoes of this blogpost is to focus on a recent research paper about Shared Parenting. 

Shared Parenting: A Review of the Supportive Research is written, well, like a research paper.  But if you can get past the classroom typeset there is a virtual goldmine of great information.  For example, she talks about the present system of mother's having primary custody which relegates fathers to seeing their children a minimal amount of time.  She makes the statement that by not allotting more time to fathers there is an unstated accusation they they are not committed to their children.

I think its pretty safe to say that is a fairly common assumption made about fathers both by the judes and the legal system and by general consensus after the court days are done and the custody papers are filed.

I found this particular idea about why fathers tend to continue to disengage from their children's lives very interesting, "First, because most fathers are awarded so little parenting time and because the children live almost exclusively with their mother, fathers are seldom able to maintain an authoritative, engaged, intense relationship with their children. Moreover, 35 percent of these fathers have no legal say in how their children are raised.

Being legally disenfranchised and physically marginalized, the father often feels demoted to a “Disneyland Dad”, an adult “playmate” or an “uncle” who can do little or no real fathering.

Then too, the mother’s behavior and attitudes often make the father feel unwelcomed and excluded (DeCuzzi & Lamb, 2004; Trinder, 2008). Indeed, too many mothers move the children such a distance away from the father that his contact is drastically reduced or ends altogether. Feeling discouraged and disheartened, unwanted and unnecessary, many dads realize from the outset that they have little or no chance to be the fathers they once were."

But wait...it gets even more interesting when she correlates this disengagement with the father-child relationship and makes quite a bold statement about the worth of a father...

"Even children and young adults who are successful in other areas of their lives often suffer from the loss of their relationship with their father. 

The question thus becomes: Even if the research were to show that shared parenting contributes absolutely nothing to children’s financial, social, educational or psychological well being at any point in their lives (which is not the case), what if shared parenting does contribute to children’s having an ongoing, meaningful relationship with their fathers for the rest of their lives?

Is their relationship in and of itself not worth as much as the other measures of “success” for children of divorce?"**

**Note that the bold is my own addition because I LOVE that question and I want to make sure you now have it rolling around in your mind.

W.O.W.  What a different point of view than our legal system has set as the precedence of determining custody.  Why is a good relationship with your father not more important to the judge and jury determining custody of a child?  Why has that relationship lost its value when thinking about the "best interest of the children?"

(Are you loving Dr. Nielsen as much as I am yet?)

How did our fathers become an afterthought?  Fortunately, Dr. Nielsen shows research that more and more people are agreeing that fathers have an important role to play in a child's life.  Unfortunately, for the purposes of this paper her conclusions are based on a shared parenting strategy where no parent has less than 30% of a child's time.  Thats still a far cry from the 50% I advocate for in this blog, but its a start. 

She continues through her paper to focus on the conflict between parents and concludes with this thought, "In shared parenting there are trade-offs to grapple with: the benefits of living with both parents versus the inconvenience of living in two homes, the challenges of coparenting versus the “winner take all” single parenting.

There are also die-hard beliefs that need to be set to rest: the belief that children will not benefit from living with both parents after divorce, the belief that fathers are generally inferior to mothers as parents, the belief that children only benefit from living with both parents when there is no conflict between them.

Despite these tradeoffs and challenges, the research is abundantly clear on this: only allowing fathers and children to live together 15 or 20 percent of the time is not in most children’s best interests. This view is widely held by experts who do research, mediation or therapy with divorced parents as evidenced by the research presented in abundance throughout this paper. Our society and our legal system can – and must – do better than this."

Hear Hear, Dr. Nielsen!  I applaud your ability to demonstrate the value of a father in today's society.  I only wish we didn't have to convince the courts of their worth.

What did you do?

“Divorce is the psychological equivalent of a triple coronary by-pass. After such a monumental assault on the heart, it takes years to amend all the habits and attitudes that led up to it.” -- Mary Kay Blakely

Confession time...I have never been divorced.  I watched my parents go through a divorce.  I've watched friends get divorced.  I've watched my sister get divorced. 

I've experienced the aftermath of my husbands divorce, but I have never gone through the legal process that would dissolve a marriage. 

So, do I have any business writing about it?  Can I possibly understand the pain and anger and sadness associated with getting a divorce?  I'd like to think I can understand.  I'd like to think I can empathize with the myriad of emotions that must be felt by both the male and female side. 

Let's consider first that based on data offered by the Center for Disease Control - there is a marriage rate at 6.8 marriages per 1,000 population and a divorce rate of 3.4 divorces per 1,000 population.  Aside from the very humorous fact that the Center for Disease Control offers data on marriage and divorce, the point I'm trying to make is not that I can do simple math, but that 50% of marriages are ending in divorce.

Next comes the big question...WHY?  Why does divorce happen?  What happened from the time you said, "I do," to the time you found yourself looking at The Causes of Divorce - When Love Can't Carry On list?

According to Yahoo! Associated Content the top reasons people get divorced are (in no particular order):
1.  Money
2.  Cheating
3.  Poor communication
4.  Change in priorities.
5.  Lack of commitment to the marriage.
6.  Sexual problems.
7.  Addictions
8.  Failed expectations of your spouse
9.  Physical, emotional or sexual abuse

So, which one are you guilty of?  Or, which one is your ex-spouse guilty of?  Actually, just from my personal experience I have found that most divorces happen because more than one of the above reasons (and maybe even a few that aren't listed) is a constant companion in the marriage.

Now moving on to the real meat and potatoes of this blog post.  Which one of those should remove you, as a father, as a constant figure in the lives of your children?

I'm not going to mince words here...if you have an addiction that is uncontrolled and in any way dangerous (i.e. you drive drunk, you like to shoot up while the kids are in bed, you bring home prostitutes...) I'm of the opinion your time with your children should be supervised or non-existent depending on the severity of your addiction. 

Abuse is another no-contest reason for me.  Abusers should not be left unsupervised with children.  Ever. 

I know that there are lots and lots of false allegations out there...remember I've been investigated as an abuser myself.  I'm not talking to you that have been wrongly accused.  I'm saying if you actually abuse another human being you need some help and you do NOT need to be around your children without supervision.
Let me ask you again - which one(s) on the list are you guilty of?

Let me just throw out this idea - Issues, problems, irreconcilable differences between adults have nothing to do with a father's love for his children and should not prohibit him from spending equal time with his children.

So, you had an affair.  You cheated on your wife.  You made her feel unloved, worthless, belittled, and embarrassed. (just to name a few) She is angry.  You are angry.  She is hurt.  You feel guilty.  Morally, you have made a mistake of enormous proportions.  It doesn't mean you should lose the right to be a father.

You mismanaged the household money and have overspent.  You can't pay the mortgage on time.  Your ex-spouse is D.O.N.E. with living paycheck to paycheck and asking her family to supplement your income.  It doesn't mean you should lose the right to be a father.

You and your ex can't talk to each other without it ending up in a shouting match with each of you trying to outdo the other by increasing your volume.  It doesn't mean you should lose the right to be a father.

You no longer want to work a 9-5 job and have decided to follow your dream, move to the country and become a farmer.  Your ex isn't as excited about your new dreams...  It doesn't mean you should lose the right to be a father.

You simply do not want to be married.  It doesn't mean you should lose the right to be a father.

You and your ex were sexually incompatible...whatever that means.  You are not physically able to relate to each other.  It doesn't mean you should lose the right to be a father.

You married a woman who you expected to be a certain way and do certain things that are crucial for your happiness.  She isn't the woman you thought she was.  It doesn't mean you should lose the right to be a father.

In fact, none of these should even be a factor in limiting your time with your children from the equal and fair distribution of 50-50 shared parenting.  

"During my years as a psychotherapist I have experienced many cases in which parents wage bitter custody battles against one another. In these battles, one parent is attempting to obtain sole custody of the children while severely restricting the visiting rights of the other parent. Under these circumstances you might be led to believe that the battle was being waged against someone who was alcohol and drug addicted and was abusive to the children. At least that would make some sense of the angry situation. However, in all too many cases there is no such addictive or abusive process going on. Rather, the motivation of the vindictive parent is to exact revenge against the other parent for sins having been committed between the two of them and having to do with their relationship and having nothing to do with any legal or violent issues. For example, an angry wife and mother may feel so entirely disappointed by the divorce that she is swept away by anger, rage and the desire to punish the former spouse by demanding sole custody." - Dr. Allen Schwartz

Is this what you are experiencing?  Are you losing the opportunity to be a father because of your ex-spouse's anger?  More often than not the answer is yes.  And, unfortunately, the family court bias is not only allowing this behavior, but encourages it by upholding the unjust and unequal standard that mothers receive custody and fathers receive visitation.

It's time for that bias to go away.