“A recent publication on parenting time by Professor Nicholas Bala and Dr. Rachel Birnbaum is entitled, “Focusing on Children in Post-Separation Parenting.” The article considers arguments made in favour of a presumption of shared parenting (that it is more just and fair) and against such a presumption (that it puts victims of family violence at further risk of harm). The Canadian government declined to include such a presumption in the recent Divorce Act amendments. The authors support the government’s decision and disagree with the notion that family justice professionals act out of economic self-interest when they decline to support a presumption. Instead, the researchers state as follows:
“Australia adopted such a reform in 2006, but abandoned it in 2012, as it resulted in increased litigation and endangered children. As in Canada, a majority of parents in Australia settle their cases, and many more make plans for shared parenting. But having a presumption in favour of shared parenting actually seemed to inflame the high conflict cases and cause more litigation. The problem with a legal presumption of shared parenting is that the cases where this is most relevant, those which are litigated, are atypical higher conflict cases….”
Professor Bala and Dr. Birnbaum highlight the importance of considering the views of children about post-separation parenting arrangements.
“Research suggests that most children appreciate having significant, continuing involvement with both parents, but that many resent the rigidity of parents who insist on “equal” parenting arrangements. Children want flexibility, especially when they reach adolescence. Most teenagers want a role in making arrangements that meet their evolving needs. Many adolescents want a significant relationship with both parents, but prefer having a “home base” rather than a division of their time in way that parents might consider “fair”.”