Author: Super User

July 19, 2019 by Robert Franklin, Esq. Member, National Board of Directors

Here’s how she begins her write-up of the Abell study:

Two decades of research present a stark message to Maryland policymakers: Unrealistic child support policies and practices entangle poor African American men and their families in poverty and have become a destabilizing force in the Baltimore community. Child support orders set beyond the ability of noncustodial parents to comply push them out of low-wage jobs, drown them in debt, hound them into the underground economy, and chase them out of their children’s lives.

What words could be more damning of a system that is meant to help kids?  Those words are amply supported by empirical facts.

Maryland’s non-custodial parents owe a whopping $1.35 billion in arrears.  That amount increases every year and, as Turetsky states, “will never be paid.”  Why?  Because courts set child support obligations at levels higher than obligors can pay.  Unsurprisingly, they don’t, and when they don’t, their debt increases.

When that happens, they tend to abandon paid work for the underground economy.  After all, paychecks can be garnished to pay child support, but cash cannot be.

And those who can’t pay are overwhelmingly likely to be poor.

Across Maryland, 50 percent of noncustodial parents in the state child support program caseload were employed in 2017, and 43 percent of these earned minimum wages or less.

Plus, the poorer the non-custodial parent, the greater the percentage of his/her income demanded by the child support system.

Maryland noncustodial parents who earn a $50,000 median income are ordered to pay 14 percent of their earnings toward child support, while noncustodial parents earning a $6,000 median income are ordered to pay 61 percent according to a University of Maryland analysis.

So it is the poorest and least able to pay who are hardest hit by child support.  What’s left for the non-custodial parent who earns little and is required to pay 61% of it in child support?  The system expects the impossible leading to parents opting out of the system altogether, which does nothing to benefit their kids.

I’ll say more about the Abell Foundation report in the near future.  Although it’s concerned strictly about matters in Maryland, the report is applicable to the country at large.

With one exception.  Unlike 32 other states, Maryland charges child support obligors no interest on their indebtedness.  In that, Maryland is an oasis of good sense in a senseless desert.  Indeed, many states still charge obligors interest at 12% and 10%, rates unpayable by the junkiest of junk bonds.  Those rates demanded of poor parents are strictly punitive.  If the parent can’t pay in the first place, what makes state lawmakers believe they can pay usurious interest too?

So, as you read the Abell Foundation report, keep in mind that, as bad as things are in Maryland, they’re worse elsewhere.

July 17, 2019 by Ginger Gentile, National Parents Organization Deputy Director

“It was just easier not to see her.”

“They left it up to me if I wanted a relationship with my dad.”

“My dad hates my mom. My brother hates my mom, and I can’t see either of them.”

For my upcoming documentary, Erasing Family, I interviewed children who had a parent erased from their lives after divorce. These children were suffering from divided loyalties and torn between two parents. In talking with so many children who have lost contact with a loving, fit parent after divorce, a pattern emerged. So profound is their need for stability that they will decide not to talk to a parent for years, even decades, in an attempt to keep the peace and love of the parent they have. These children are desperate to avoid conflict, which caused them to run away from the “other” parent.

Some of these families had 50/50 child custody arrangements, but they were not honored by one parent and the courts didn’t enforce them. Family courts allow children to state who they want to live with but don’t investigate what led to that statement. So a tense family dynamic isn’t stopped by the courts, rather, it feeds on it.

As we fight for default shared parenting, it is important to remember that we need to look at 50/50 custody holistically and make sure that parents have the tools to implement it successfully. Do they have parenting classes on how to stop arguing? Anger management programs? Free mediation to keep them out of court? Support services, like free child care and afterschool programs to allow a stay-at-home-parent to transition into the workplace? Does our parental leave offer equal (and paid!) time off for both mothers and fathers?

Kids want to have a relationship with both parents after divorce and separation. Default shared parenting is the first step in this direction, but it is not the only step that must be taken by families and society.

NPO Study Prompts Ohio Counties to Update Parenting Time Rules

July 16, 2019 by Don Hubin, PhD

When we think of success in promoting shared parenting, the image that often comes to mind is NPO’s stunning success in Kentucky. There, Matt Hale led a successful movement for a dramatic legislative change. In Ohio, we haven’t been able to duplicate this sort of shared parenting home run … yet! But a study that several of us undertook last year seems to be producing base hits.

In 2018, Frank Glandorf, Julie Carpenter-Hubin, and I reviewed the parenting time guidelines of each of Ohio’s county courts, grading these on the degree to which they promoted equal shared parenting. The results, presented in the NPO Ohio Parenting Time Report, were depressing but not surprising. Sixty-four of Ohio’s 88 counties were still locked into the “every-other-weekend-and-one-evening-a-week” model that dates from the Madmen era.

This approach to separated parenting has never been shown by scientific research to be beneficial to children and, even if there was a time when it made sense, we are far beyond that time. The work and parenting patterns of modern families are far different from those of the 1950s.

Shortly after the publication of the NPO study, there were already signs that it was having an impact. The lone county to receive an ‘F’ was surprised to find out that their guidelines specified that it was “Father” who was to have the every-other-weekend schedule. We know that when such a schedule is imposed, it is almost always father who is taken out of a full parenting role for the children. But courts weren’t supposed to say that out loud. The Van Wert magistrate was taken aback at the presence of the gendered language and indicated that the rule would be reviewed.

Several other county courts, or the bar associations in the county, let NPO know that they would be reviewing their guidelines, some seeking NPO’s input.

Now, we’re seeing the fruits of our efforts. We learned last week that two counties had changed their rules. One moved from a good, but not great parenting time schedule to one that presumes equal parenting time by both parents. Another moved from the old every-other-weekend schedule to present multiple options, one of which is at least a vast improvement over this schedule and two of which allow the children equal time with each parent.

In addition, NPO has just learned that the only Ohio county out of all 88 to earn an ‘F’ did more than remove its gendered language. It recently enacted a new parenting time rule that presents parents with multiple options, the very first of which allows the children equal time with both parents.

Those of us in Ohio will continue working for equal parenting legislation similar to Kentucky’s. But it’s worth remembering that while all home runs produce scores, there are ways to run up the score with base hits as well. Through different strategies, NPO is making a difference in children’s lives.

July 15, 2019 by Dr. Linda Nielsen

Based on the social science research summarized in my books for the past three decades, after parents separate, fathers’ relationships with their daughters are generally more damaged than their relationships with their sons.^{1, 2} This is not especially surprising since, when parents are living together, mothers generally have closer relationships with their daughters than with their sons. Mothers also generally disclose more personal information and seek advice and comfort more often from their daughters. Daughters are more likely than sons to hear damaging information about their dads from their moms and to end up being their mom’s confidante and “counselor”—a situation that generally gets worse and further weakens the father-daughter relationship after the parents separate.

Three situations that do the most damage to the father-daughter relationship are the mom’s refusal to share the physical custody of the children, her gatekeeping behaviors, and her negative reactions to the dad’s girlfriend or new wife. ^1,2

Based on peer reviewed published articles summarizing the 60 studies that compared the outcomes for children in sole and shared physical custody, children fare better in families where they live with their dad at least 35% of the time.³ Many scholars have independently reached this conclusion, including 112 international experts in a consensus paper,³ 12 experts at an international conference on shared parenting,⁴ and 33 mental health and family law professionals at a think tank sponsored by the Association of Family & Conciliatory Courts.⁵ Interestingly, in those studies where there were differences between the sons’ and daughters’ well-being, shared physical custody was generally more beneficial for girls in terms of not being clinically depressed or having an anxiety disorder. ³

The second damaging factor is maternal gatekeeping.^{6, 7} Gatekeeping is a situation where the mom intentionally or unintentionally behaves in ways that close the metaphorical “gate” between fathers and children. The gatekeeping mother believes that she is the better parent and that the children need and benefit more from mothering time than from fathering time. Gatekeeping can and does occur in married families. But it is more prevalent after parents separate. For example, after divorce, the mom might not allow the kids to have pictures of their dad in her home, might make it difficult for him to spend time with them, and might badmouth him and his extended family. Since moms are typically closer to their daughters than to their sons, these gatekeeping behaviors may be especially damaging to father-daughter relationships.

Compared to sons’ relationships, the father-daughter bond also tends to deteriorate more when the dad becomes involved in a serious romantic relationship, especially if he remarries ^1,2, Daughters react more negatively to stepmoms than to stepdads—and they react more negatively than sons. ⁸ This, in turn, makes the father-daughter relationship even more fragile and more complicated. In part this happens because fathers and stepfathers are generally more accepting of each other than are mothers and stepmothers. Then too, divorced men usually remarry before their ex-wives. So the first stepparent children have to get used to is a stepmom. Dad’s remarriage also tends to increase the conflict between the two parents and creates tension between the mom, stepmom, and kids. The drama, jealousy, and conflict is likely to take the greatest toll on the father daughter bond since daughters are more likely than sons to hear their mom complain about the stepmom or about dad’s new girlfriend.

Well before the parents separate, dads need to be more aware of what is likely to happen in their relationships with their daughters—and to more fully understand the root of these problems. There are steps that dads can take to minimize the damage. Among them are spending more time alone with their daughters without their sons around—time spent talking and doing things together like hiking, cooking or playing a one-on-one sport like golf or tennis. Dozens of these activities and specific questions for dads to discuss with teenage or young adult daughters are described in my book, “Between fathers and daughters: Enriching or rebuilding your relationship.” Other ideas are available on my Psychology Today blog site. ⁹

You can purchase Dr. Nielsen’s book Between Fathers and Daughters: Enriching and Rebuilding your Adult Relationship here and her book Embracing Your Father: How to Build the Relationship You’ve Always Wanted with Your Dad here.

Reference List

     (1)   Nielsen L. (2008) Between fathers and daughters: Enriching and rebuilding your adult relationship. Nashville: Turner Publishing

https://www.amazon.com/Between-Fathers-Daughters-Rebuilding-Relationship/dp/1581826613/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=linda+nielsen&qid=1563041632&s=books&sr=1-2;

     (2)   Nielsen L. (2019) Fathers and Daughters: Contemporary Research and Issues. New York: Routledge, second edition. https://www.amazon.com/Father-Daughter-Relationships-Textbooks-Family-Studies/dp/0367232871/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=linda+nielsen&qid=1563041713&s=books&sr=1-1

     (3)   Nielsen L. Joint versus sole physical custody: Children’s outcomes independent of parent-child relationships, income and conflict in 60 studies. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage 2018;59:247-281.

     (4)   Braver S, Lamb M. Shared parenting after parental separation: The views of 12 experts. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage 2018;59:372-387.

     (5)   Pruett M, DiFonzo H. Closing the gap: Research, policy, practice and shared parenting. Family Court Review 2014;44:152-174.

     (6)   Ganong L, Coleman M, Chapman A. Gatekeeping after separation and divorce. In: Drozd L, Saini M, Olesen N, editors. Parenting plan evaluations: Applied research for the family court.New York: Oxford University Press; 2016. 308-346.

     (7)   Austin B, Fieldstone L, Pruett M. Bench book for assessing parental gatekeeping in parenting disputes. Journal of Child Custody 2013;10:1-16.

     (8)   Papernow P. Surviving and thriving in stepfamily relationships: What works and what doesn’t. New York: Routledge; 2013.

     (9)   Nielsen L. Father-daughter relationships. Psychology Today blog site https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/fathers-daughters. 2019.

July 14, 2019