High‐Conflict Divorce: A form of Child Neglect

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12249
• Published date: 01 October 2016
• Date: 01 October 2016

STUDENT NOTES

HIGH-CONFLICT DIVORCE: A FORM OF CHILD NEGLECT

Alexa N. Joyce

In high-conflict divorce cases, the emotional toll on the family unit is unquestionably destructive. While the physical and

mental health of the children should be the primary focus, the emotional turmoil of a high-conflict divorce often moves the

focus away from the children as parents struggle emotionally and financially. Although the best interests of the children are

always in the judicial purview, the repeated, lengthy, and hostile litigation process often associated with high-conflict disso-

lution has lasting effects on the physical and mental health of children, similar to those associated with physical abuse and

neglect. Child Protective Services (CPS) must step in and protect the emotional well-being of children during high-conflict

divorce cases.

Key Points for the Family Law Community:

High-conflict divorce is detrimental to the entire family unit and often causes emotional and psychological harm to the

children.

Children entrenched in their parents’ high-conflict divorce experience emotional neglect.

Emotional neglect is an under-recognized form of child neglect that warrants state intervention through Child Protec-

tive Services.

Emotional neglect is underreported and often unrecognizable to the untrained eye.

Child Protective Services must be responsible for investigating possible emotional neglect in high-conflict divorce

cases and connecting families with appropriate therapeutic interventions.

An attorney for the child must be appointed where Child Protective Services is forced to petition the court for compli-

ance with therapeutic intervention or services.

Keywords: Child Abuse; Child Neglect; Child Protective Services; Divorce; Emotional Harm; Emotional Neglect; High

Conflict; Mental Health; Parental Conflict; Social Work Perspective; and Therapeutic Intervention.

I. INTRODUCTION

Everyone in the courtroom was crying—everyone but the parents of the two young children. The

case began as a typical divorce. After three years of expensive, lengthy, and draining litigation, the

case was finally set for trial. What made this case unique, however, was the presence of the New Jer-

sey Division of Child Protection and Permanency (DCPP)

1

and a law guardian

2

appointed to repre-

sent the two minor children. A DCPP case was opened when the parents began making baseless

allegations of sexual abuse and child neglect. Although the allegations were unfounded, the case

remained open because the father continued to make accusations of physical abuse and neglect

against the mother on a biweekly basis. The caseworker was the only adult willing to supervise and

facilitate visitation between the brothers. He understood how precious their visits were together and

the importance of sibling bonding to the emotional and developmental health of the boys. Additional-

ly, the court-appointed law guardian was not comfortable being removed from the case and leaving

the two minor children with no voice or representation.

The mother in this case remained in the marital home with the younger child, Michael, age six.

3

The father, upon being “evicted” from the mother’s rental home, decided to move to the farthest

Correspondence: ajoyce4@pride.hofstra.edu

FAMILY COURT REVIEW, Vol. 54 No. 4, October 2016 642–656

V

C2016 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts