(c) Tagesanzeiger – Mamablog editorial team on Friday, June 1, 2012 – Bettina Weber
Max Peter (71) is a family mediator and family therapist. He believes that there must be consequences if parents do not adhere to visitation agreements after a divorce and use children as leverage.
Last week, Federal Councillor Simonetta Sommaruga confirmed that joint custody will become the norm in divorce cases. What do you think of that?Joint custody is definitely a step forward. And I am convinced that it has a preventative effect and that children will be less likely to be used as leverage.
If two people can no longer talk to each other, that doesn't help either.
That's right, it's not a cure-all. It won't work for so-called high-conflict couples. I know fathers who are already raring to go, rubbing their hands in glee because they think, "Well, with the new law, I'll finally have a say." Of course, that's not how it works.
The initial draft of the law included threats of fines if parents failed to adhere to agreements, for example, by denying visitation rights. These sanctions have now been removed without replacement. You, however, would have supported them.
Fines aren't the perfect solution, but they would at least have signaled a willingness to no longer tolerate a parent's obstruction. Today, this has no consequences; the authorities feign powerlessness. And whoever is behind these disputes is laughing up their sleeve, knowing full well that their behavior will go unpunished.
Are you calling for more force to be used against parents who don't comply?
I advocate for giving equal attention to child custody arrangements as to financial matters. To this day, however, violations of visitation agreements are met with a shrug and the response, "Well, if one parent isn't cooperating, there's nothing we can do," and that's the end of it. I don't understand why there are sanctions for violating building codes, but none for disregarding divorce agreements. Especially since everyone always emphasizes how much the child's well-being is their priority!
What do you suggest?
It should be permissible to assess whether a parent who repeatedly violates agreements is still capable of acting in the child's best interests. If the assessment is negative, this could result in the termination of parental rights, a reorganization of custody arrangements, or the suspension of visitation rights.
That would be perceived as a massive intrusion.
And that's exactly how it should be! Custody rights are sacrosanct, considered inviolable. But when someone denies or fails to exercise visitation rights, that's not a matter between adults. The child's best interests are severely compromised, and that should be sanctioned. This also has positive consequences: In France, where such sanctions have been in place since 2002, a societal shift has occurred. Those who don't abide by agreements and thereby harm their children are ostracized.
What do children suffer from most when their parents separate?
At first, children long for a perfect world. They're told stories about the princess and the prince who live happily ever after. And at a very young age, they have to learn that reality is quite different. Then they find it very difficult to cope with arguments between their parents. The same is true when they're used as messengers between their parents, indirectly delivering messages: Is Mommy's new boyfriend still there? Has Daddy been drinking beer again? This makes children uncomfortable, but out of loyalty to their parents, they don't dare say anything. They want to please everyone.
Can children survive a divorce unscathed?
Undamaged?
Let's say: at least not seriously damaged.
It is possible, despite everything. I don't believe that every child of divorce is damaged for the rest of their life. But it is a profound experience, a turning point. Some need at least occasional professional support and guidance.
What do parents, presumably often not out of malice, do most frequently go wrong?
They forbid children from talking to one parent about the other. This is very difficult for children because they are expected to strictly separate their mother's and father's worlds. This is common practice and one of the worst things parents can do to their children. Another example: In one family, consideration was previously given to the fact that the son doesn't like fish. Now the father has a new girlfriend and allows her to say: "At our table, we eat everything." This is terrible. For the child, it's not just the fish, but a part of his world that is no longer respected – and his own father isn't standing by him. But the father is also caught in a compulsion; he wants to please his new partner.
What do parents underestimate the most?
That they remain parents. That they remain committed to their responsibility, together, towards their children. They don't even forget this out of malice, but because they are so preoccupied with themselves. And then they underestimate the fact that the children grow up. And that parents who haven't learned to remain parents despite all the adversity are confronted with even greater problems when these children grow up and their guidance becomes more demanding. I insist that mothers and fathers learn to distinguish between the partner level and the parent level.
Is it just an impression, or are divorces actually becoming increasingly bitter?
In a certain sense, yes. There are far more emotions involved than before. In the past, it was often a rational decision: people came to the conclusion that it wasn't working anymore and separated. Today, marriage is associated with so many and such high expectations that there's a correspondingly large amount of anger and disappointment when it doesn't work out.
That's paradoxical: Today, when every second marriage fails and divorce is no longer a stigma, the burden is supposed to be greater than before?
Despite its frequency, it's not a given. I know couples who lost their entire circle of friends because of their divorce, as it wasn't accepted. Furthermore, women are still more often judged or ostracized for it. A divorced woman has a different social standing than a divorced man.