Part of May and  part of June, is National Family Month. The objective of recognizing this period between Mother’s Day and Father’s Day is to build a nation of confident kids and healthier families. The celebration was created by KidsPeace to raise awareness and underscore the importance of family — kids, mothers, fathers, relatives and caregivers — and to encourage supporting one another. National Family Month is an opportunity for families to enjoy special time together, to foster and renew relationships, identify or discover needs and to remind everyone of the importance of family involvement in raising healthy, confident kids for America’s future.  My focus this week is on joint custody as a means to highlight the importance of family.  Despite the fact that family can be defined based on where one receives love, support and guidance, I wanted to take this time to specifically address joint child custody.

          The soaring of single family households has set off debates in social policy discussions and political agendas in the past few decades.  Numerous studies show that children raised in single parent households are more likely to fall behind academically, become drug/alcohol abusers, are more likely to become sociopaths, amongst being infirmed with many other social ills.  However, there is documented research that indicates that there are just as many children of high-conflict families that tend to have adjustment issues and therefore wind up becoming substance abusers, delinquents and academic failures where both parents are in the home.  The one inference that can be drawn from all or most of these studies, as well as many similar studies, is that children are more likely to excel and to become productive members of society when conflict among the parents is at a minimum or non-existent, in any family setting.  Thus, the main argument against joint child custody seems to be circular.
         This happens to be the major debate amongst anti-joint child custody advocates across the nation.  Currently there are 37 states plus Washington D.C. that have either a presumption of joint custody or a strong preference for joint child custody, while many other states has had proposed legislation for either.  And although there some antagonists who say that joint child custody should not be presumed or preferred under any circumstance, even in situations where the only disagreement between the parents is with regards to a parenting time schedule, in many of these presumption or preference states the children fare a lot better than those that do not.  These children are more likely to transition from divorce or separation much more smoothly than those in sole custody arrangements.  In fact, recent data has shown that the divorce rate in joint child custody states is significantly lower than other states. Although there is little dispute of the deleterious affect of high conflict on children, how one assesses the conflict, addresses it and prevents it all affect the overall family structure no matter what the family dynamics.    So the critics’ concern that instability, tension and dissension makes joint child custody impossible and impractical does not necessarily have merit.  Dissolving or disrupting the family is not necessarily the way to address these issues.  As the supporters suggest, some continuity, maintaining a relationship with both parents and respecting both parents’ rights to raise their family should be the norm and not the exception. Conflict is usually a sign of some underlying issue, that can be resolved by other means which are not necessarily mutually exclusive with joint child custody.   I do agree that there are some families that are incapable of functioning normally no matter what.  However, I believe that families should be given a lot more authority and resources to work it out amongst themselves.
          There are some states that enacted legislation which presumes or prefers joint child custody.  New York is not one of them. In fact New York will only order joint child custody if the parties agree or even if they do agree, if there is no history of domestic violence or breakdown of communication.  Let me define joint child custody under New York law.  Joint custody can be specified in two different terms a) joint legal custody and b) joint physical custody.  Joint legal custody is the joint decision making regarding the educational, religious and major medical issues.  The day-to-day decisions are usually left up to the custodial parent.  This means that decisions regarding whether the child should attend private school as opposed to public school, for instance, will be made by both parents not just the parent the child resides with.  While joint physical custody, on the other hand,  is the sharing of the decision making and the actual living arrangements.  The child spends an equal amount of time residing with both parents.  In this situation, all of the decisions are made by both parents since the child usually spends part of the school week at one parent’s home and the other part and the other parent’s home.  This scenario is not as common as joint legal custody, particularly because it requires both parent’s maintaining living space for the child, dual set of personal belongings, liberal communication, etc.  And although in New York joint physical custody does not absolve either parent of their responsibility of paying child support, there are instances where neither party pays the other child support. 
          I recently went to the American Bar Association & American Psychological Association’s Joint Conference on Child Custody where the future of joint child custody was addressed.  The one point that seemed to prevail amongst the mental health professionals with a position on joint child custody was that the legal system is not necessarily the answer.  In high conflict cases or not, the need for parenting education, parenting coordinators, mediators (or conflict resolution) mental health services has a greater potential for making joint child custody work.  I do agree that attorneys, judges, etc. oftentimes only serve to exacerbate the problem.  Although there are some instances where the parents need court-ordered services to help guide them, a lot of times the person most suitable to make decisions about their family is that person who is on the frontline.

          Feel free to contact my office on your family law issues.