Letter to the Editor

Shared parenting

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Dear Editor,

It was with great disappointment that I read Sen. Mark Christensen's letter back to McCook printed in the McCook Gazette Feb. 13, 2013. Sen. Christensen's descriptions of LB 22 and LB 212 and their potential problems is simply wrong. LB 22 and LB 212 are based upon recent, peer reviewed, psychological research into parenting plans and their effect on children both in the short and long term.

The research, which was presented to the Judiciary Committee that Senator Christensen sits on, shows that on virtually every level or measurement, from overall self-esteem and confidence, to physical health and early mortality, children of divorce who grow up in households where parents share time at a close to 50/50 arrangement do much better than those where one parent is limited in the amount of time they can spend with the child or children.

The evidence on the subject is more than compelling. It is not one or two studies, but in fact the Judiciary Committee was given an overview of nearly two dozen studies done in the last 10 to 15 years.

The result of the research is a finding that the current status quo in divorce or paternity actions where one parent is given custody and the other parent is given minimal parenting time (every other weekend, some holidays, and time in the summer), is actually harming children. The harm to the child is not just in the short term, but long term as well.

At the hearing in front of the judiciary committee on LB 22 and LB 212, approximately 120 people attended, more people than attended the governor's plan to do away with the Nebraska Income Tax. An overflow room had to be opened. So many people sought to speak in favor of the bills that their comments and the number of people allowed to speak was limited to one hour. Opponents took less than 30 minutes and the few people there to speak in opposition were all heard. Supporters outnumbered opponents at the hearing by a ratio of 10 to 1. Sen. Christensen did not attend.

Sen. Christensen in his letter back to McCook states that he fears that "shared parenting between two parents that cannot get along could cause an increase in parental conflict and create drawn out court battles."

The research the committee was given concludes just the opposite. Modification actions, where parties go back to court because the original order is not working or needs to be changed go down in number when shared parenting is put in place. This is not because only sane parents enter into shared parenting arrangements in the first place. Even those shared parenting plans put in place by judicial decree last longer than plans that put custody primarily in one parent's hands.

I know from my own practice that tends to be true. When one parent loses custody, they pick up the pieces and begin preparing for round two, and wait for their chance to act and try again. Or, they give up and fade away. Neither choice is good for the child. The research shows that even in cases of "high conflict," the shared parenting plans are more durable, and children report a greater satisfaction with the arrangement. Shouldn't that be the main focus of parenting plans? Not the parents who can't get along, but what the kids need and want?

Sen. Christensen also writes "another issue that was a point of concern in the hearing, is the potential decrease in child support payments." In fact, the research shows that fathers in a shared custody arrangement spend more on their children both when they are in their own home and the home of their former spouse than those fathers who have minimal time given to them by the courts. Is that not the goal?

In Nebraska, the child support guidelines already increase support by half when the parties are going to be in a shared parenting arrangement. Child support is increases by 1.5 times and then divided between the parents, depending upon how many days each has. The net result may be that people who may have had sole custody in the past would receive less cash from the other parent when the parents now share custody, but actual dollars spend on the child go up.

Lastly, Sen. Christensen wrote "many groups feel that these bills do not help protect domestic violence victims."

These "many" groups did not appear at the hearing. In addition, nothing in either bill takes anything away from the numerous protections that already exist in our Nebraska statutes that make up the parenting act. In addition, there is no research that indicates that shared parenting increases the risk of domestic violence.

The few opponents who appeared may have expressed their concerns with "maybe," or "could," but no one in opposition produced research. How do you argue with the data that directly addresses their concerns? It's too bad Sen. Christensen only listened to the concerns without taking the time to read the research presented to discover the concerns were without merit.

Isn't it time that lawmakers made smart decisions based upon recent, peer reviewed research as to a best course of action rather then hand wringing by a select few who have no empirical research to rely upon? Why would we not do this?

Chris A. Johnson

Conway, Pauley & Johnson

Hastings, Nebraska

Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: