Joint custody from the SP's perspective

Sharing our concerns – Silvia Schenker, SP National Councillor Basel City

It is desirable and deserved for every child to have regular contact with both parents and to share everyday life with them. This should be possible regardless of the parents' marital status and regardless of their relationship with each other.

Striving for this ideal should be everyone's goal. Reality is different. Not only due to divorce, but also for other reasons, many children grow up with one parent and see the other parent more or less regularly, or even rarely.

A new legal provision is now intended to introduce joint custody as the norm. This proposal is being hotly debated. Proponents are convinced that this is a step towards shared responsibility for both parents, even after a divorce. Others fear that making joint custody the norm will turn children into pawns in the power struggle between quarreling parents, without changing the unequal distribution of the burden of caregiving responsibilities.

For me, the child's welfare is paramount when assessing the Federal Council's proposals for a new legal provision. The framework must be designed in such a way as to give this concern the greatest possible consideration. Nevertheless, we must guard against wishful thinking in the legislative process: Joint custody is only good and sensible if the parents are able to effectively exercise this shared responsibility in everyday life without constantly having to argue about every decision. Joint custody also implies shared or alternating care and supervision. The distribution of rights and responsibilities must be balanced. The parents must be able to credibly demonstrate that they intend to structure and practice custody in this way. Should the court conclude that this is not possible, the option of sole custody must remain. After all, someone who fails to fulfill their responsibilities cannot unilaterally assert rights.

If one parent seeks joint custody, the other parent should not have the sole power to refuse it. In such cases, a suitable agency should be tasked with mediating between the parents and attempting to establish the basis for joint custody.

Sharing parenting responsibilities after a (conflictual) separation is not easy. For the sake of the children, as many couples as possible should take on this difficult task – for the well-being of their children and for their own well-being. 

VeV comment 

The VeV has been advocating for the introduction of joint custody as the norm for years. We are therefore all the more pleased to hear increasingly constructive proposals and also criticism from the SP. Both the proposed parental agreement, which is worth considering, and the present text demonstrate that the SP has also recognized the signs of the times and is prepared to take the political step towards shared parental responsibility.

The concerns raised by Ms. Schenker were for a long time the reason for a vehement rejection of joint custody altogether. A change of course has clearly taken place here, which is very welcome.

These concerns are of course to be taken seriously and are quite understandable from our perspective as well.

The child's best interests must always be the primary consideration in all decisions, because only with this focus can lasting good solutions be found.

However, it's important to remember that circumstances can change over the years. What was in the child's best interest at the time of the decision may not necessarily be so a few years later. Flexible solutions are needed – maintaining joint custody for both parents is certainly one of them.

We, too, believe that only shared parental responsibility truly benefits children; we also consider a mere right to have a say without actual participation to be problematic. Nevertheless, we must not lose sight of what custody is really about. It is by no means about everyday decisions, but rather fundamental decisions in the child's life. In our view, the fact that a second parent might intervene and take a different stance in such decisions leads to better safeguarding the child's interests, because the disagreement leads to discussions and compromises.

From our perspective, implementing shared parental responsibility also includes the widespread introduction of court-ordered mediation. Only through such accompanying measures is it possible in the long term to help separating parents maintain their co-parenting relationship and keep the dialogue going regarding the child's basic needs.

In this sense, thank you very much, Ms. Schenker, for your open and modern attitude on this issue.