Observer 23/05 from November 10, 2005 by Edit Lier
In nine out of ten divorce cases, parental responsibility is awarded to the mother. Then it is up to them how often the father sees the child. A power that is often abused.
| Everyone talks about the welfare of the child, even if they ignore the welfare of the child. “The term is worn out, worn out and therefore almost no longer usable,” says CVP National Councilor Reto Wehrli. He advocates that parents generally receive joint custody in the event of a divorce. The word “best interests of the child” appeared only once in the corresponding postulate that he submitted to the large chamber: in a third-party quote.
The postulate was referred to the Federal Council in this autumn session with a large majority. But supporters and opponents clashed like quarreling spouses in a divorce. The negative attitude of the SP women's trio Jacqueline Fehr, Anita Thanei and Ruth-Gaby Vermot-Mangold, who are otherwise progressive in terms of family policy, caused people to shake their heads in their own ranks (see side article "Chantal Galladé: Parents always remain parents, even after a divorce"). There is no question: joint custody remains a problem child. Clear path for desire for revenge “Under the existing regulations, mothers actually have a right of veto, which fathers perceive as a central power factor in controversial separation and divorce processes,” notes Markus Theunert. His position as president of menschen.ch, the umbrella organization of Swiss men's and fathers' organizations: Disunited parents should at least be able to fight on equal terms. His association, together with the Federation of Swiss Women's Organizations Alliance F, wants to contribute to a gender-democratic and politically based solution. Those responsible will jointly invite experts to an interdisciplinary conference next summer. Sibylle Burger-Bono, President of alliance F and who has been working as a divorce lawyer for twelve years, emphasizes: “We want to objectify the discussion and not pit women against men.” The Romands have it better At the guardianship authority of the city of Zurich, granting joint parental custody is part of day-to-day business - and the trend is increasing. Last year, 255 couples received joint custody; the previous year there were 201. Now science should help “Children’s concerns such as care, visits and custody as well as the children’s perspective are the focus of our study,” explains Heidi Simoni, head of practical research at the MMI. Those involved in the project are convinced that with scientifically based basic material they can make a significant contribution to the upcoming political discussion about joint custody. The first evaluations should be available by the middle of next year. “This time, science is a step ahead of politics,” says Heidi Simoni happily. The Federal Court had to concern itself with the child's welfare twice this year. In a fundamental decision, it stipulated that in the event of a divorce, a child after the age of six must be heard before the judges decide on the allocation of parental custody. Previously, the age limit varied between ten and twelve years. The Federal Court also sent a clear message when it came to the design of visitation rights: the child's best interests always apply as the highest guideline - any interests of the parents have to take second place. The alienated child Salgo also suggests offering advice and information in schools. For parents who want to divorce, he even goes one step further and advocates mandatory state counseling, as is mandatory in the US state of Florida for parents of children under 17 in the event of separation and divorce. “Sometimes I wish I had the church marriage counseling back that made future parents aware of their responsibilities,” he sums up. Men who feel cheated of their visitation rights are increasingly using an argument imported from the USA: PAS (Parental Alienation Syndrome). It includes the accusation of alienation of the child through conscious or unconscious manipulation by a parent, usually the mother: she tries to turn the child against the father, ignores visitation rights or claims that the child does not want to see the father. The father, on the other hand, often insists on “contact at all costs”. In such a complicated situation, the controversial “confrontation therapy”, which also comes from the USA, comes into play in some cases. Photos of naked girls His concern grew further when he learned that a previous victim had sent the guardianship authorities photos of naked girls that Heinz P. had taken years ago. “Since the danger report in July 2004, the authorities have done nothing to protect my son,” says Stefan S. Only at the urging of his lawyer did the authorities release the dubious recordings of Heinz P. S. cannot be reassured by the fact that the statute of limitations has expired. “No acute danger” Stefan S. lodged a complaint against the report: "In order to assess whether my son is at risk when dealing with Heinz P., no child psychiatric examinations are required." It would only put unnecessary strain on his child and would not change P.'s past. The father and his lawyer cannot understand the hesitant behavior of the guardianship authority: "It would be cynical and irresponsible if something were only done when the child's physical integrity has already been violated." While the mother obtained accompanied visitation rights for the father of just one afternoon per month, even though there was nothing against him, Heinz P. can maintain free contact with the child. If there had been even the slightest suspicion of sexual assault against the biological father, the guardianship authorities would have immediately banned him from having any contact with the child until it was clear. “It’s crazy,” says Stefan S. *all names changed |
“Excluded and betrayed”: The amputee father “Dad, we’re not coming to you”: The abandoned father “Our child is seriously ill”: The demonized father Chantal Galladé: “Parents always remain parents, even after a divorce” |