A Presumption Against Shared Parenting for Family Court Litigants

• Date: 01 April 2014
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12081
• Author: Peter Jaffe
• Published date: 01 April 2014

A PRESUMPTION AGAINST SHARED PARENTING FOR

FAMILY COURT LITIGANTS

Peter Jaffe

Shared parenting is the most beneficial model for planning the future of many separating parents and their children. Shared

parenting needs to be crafted,for appropriate cases, by willing parents on their own or through coaching by responsible lawyers,

counselors, or mediators. Shared parenting is not an outcome that should be forced on high-conflict parents against their will

as a compromise in the hopes that they will grow into the plan. Separating parents with a history of domestic violence need to

receive appropriate screening and assessment on the nature of the violence, the impact of the violence on the adult victim and

children, and the interventions required by the perpetrator before a safe parenting plan can be designed. TheThink Tank Report

on shared parenting is to be commended for its work. The Report acknowledgessome of the limitations of shared parenting in

situations that pose risks to children and/or inadvertently promote ongoing conflicts between parents. My concern is that

domestic violence victims will be forced into shared parenting or fear being labeled as “hostile” and “unfriendly parents” or

accused of alienation. There continues to be a need for much more professional education on the ongoing risks of domestic

violence and the implications for differentiated parenting plans.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:

• Shared parenting is not for everyone.

• Litigating parents are unlikely to make shared parenting work.

• Case of domestic violence require screening and a differentiated parenting plan that recognizes safety, accountability

and healing.

Keywords: Differentiated Parenting Plans;Domestic Violence;Shared Parenting;and Unintended Consequences of

Presumptions.

At the outset of this commentary, I would like to commend Dr. Marsha Klein Pruett and Professor

J. Herbie DiFonzo and theAFCC Think Tank participants for pulling together a thoughtful review of

the research, policy, and practice in shared parenting. There is no doubt that the Think Tank pulled

together a distinguished and diverse group of leaders in the field to address the most critical issues.

The report is well written and structured in a clear manner that recognizes many of the controversies.

The title of my commentary is not intended to be a legal presumption, but rather a frame of

reference to suggest that shared parenting should not be presumed for family court litigants. These

litigants should have an onus on them to prove to the court that they could manage shared parenting

in the event that any judge would consider such an option on an involuntary basis for one or both

parents.

SHARED PARENTINGAS A FOUNDATIONAL CONCEPT FOR PREVENTION,

BUT NOT FOR LITIGATION

Shared parenting is the ideal outcome for many separating and divorcing parents and their children.

Information about the benefits (and limitations) of shared parenting should be part of the education of

professionals working with children and families and court-related legal and mental health profes-

sionals including lawyers, mediators, and judges. Public awareness campaigns should promote the

benefit of shared parenting and postseparation parent education programs should encourage shared

parenting. However, parents who enter the justice system to litigate about child custody or access have

passed the point where shared parenting should be presumed or even encouraged.

FAMILY COURT REVIEW, Vol. 52 No. 2, April 2014 187–192

© 2014 Association of Familyand Conciliation Cour ts