Giving children a voice takes conflict out of divorce

Amazing how dumb these "experts' are.
But why expose the kids to manipulation and fear.

Can you imaging how much pressure your little girl for instance is put under to support her mother.
Can you imaging the pressure that's brought to bear by phycologists brought in to treat the child's behaviour with the mother after daddy been removed from her life.
Sure most kids are going to want fairness ... and both their parents in their lives.
Wouldn't it be easier to make the exclusion of one parent by the other illegal?
and not to bring the kids in to demonstrate this simple truth.

Regards,Simon
vascopajama@dodo.com.au


On 12/10/06, gcpg wrote:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20563011-2702,00.html

Giving children a voice takes conflict out of divorce
Caroline Overington
October 11, 2006

DIVORCING parents often try to keep the children out of the conflict. New research shows it may be the worst thing they can do.

A report by child psychologist Jenn McIntosh shows that when children are included in the debate about a collapsing marriage, the outcome is better for both parents, especially fathers, and for the children.

Divorcing parents who were presented with evidence of the effect of their squabbling on their children - in the form of their child's writing or drawings - were less likely to end up in the Family Court, and their post-separation parenting plans became more durable.

"We suspected that children would benefit if they were being heard," Dr McIntosh said. "But the fact that fathers gained so much from the experience - we didn't expect that."

More than 140 families with 364 children participated in the study, funded by the Attorney-General's Department for the Australian Institute of Family Studies' October seminar.

Attorney-General Philip Ruddock was behind this year's changes to family law, which require separating parents to at least attempt to negotiate at a Family Relationship Centre before approaching the Family Court, unless violence is an issue.

Dr McIntosh divided warring parents into two groups: the "child-focused" group, which received generic information about how conflict can damage children; and a "child inclusive" group, in which parents were given drawings and writing by their own children on how the collapsing marriage was affecting them.

The process had to be handled delicately, and by experts. "It's not just a case of sitting down with children and saying, so, how do you feel about Mum and Dad getting a divorce?" Dr McIntosh said. "That would be a terrible over-simplification."

But the result was clear: parents who were told exactly how their squabbling was affecting the children "quickly modified their behaviour".

"If you say to parents, 'Your conflict hurts children', that's one thing. But if you say to them, 'This is what your child is actually saying', that's a different thing," Dr McIntosh said.

"The level of conflict dropped dramatically. Parents seemed to get a wake-up call. They were moved by the things they heard from their children."

Fathers were more likely to see a parenting arrangement as "fair" after seeing the impact of conflict on their children.

It is not yet clear whether the "child inclusive" model will be adopted by the Family Relationship Centres. While it seems effective, it is also expensive.

But Dr McIntosh said the process "certainly encourages parents to think like adults," which is one of the things Mr Ruddock has been trying to achieve.

"It can help them push the domino over in the right direction, and while there is pain, grief, upset, they need to keep their eye on the ball, which is the children."

She said the "executive functioning" kicks in, "where they say, 'That's right, I have children who are dependent upon me' ".

"It seems to allow both parents to swallow the bitter pill."

© The Australian