1 / 18

Divorce Conference - Valencia Saturday 16th of October 2010

Co-parenting over time The impact of legislative changes on the incidence and predictors of joint custody. Divorce Conference - Valencia Saturday 16th of October 2010. An Katrien Sodermans Koen Matthijs Research Group Family & Population. CeS0. K.U.Leuven.

oliveras
Download Presentation

Divorce Conference - Valencia Saturday 16th of October 2010

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Co-parenting over timeThe impact of legislative changes on the incidence and predictors of joint custody Divorce Conference - Valencia Saturday 16th of October 2010 An Katrien Sodermans Koen Matthijs Research Group Family & Population. CeS0. K.U.Leuven

  2. Evolutions in the area of child custody • Changed evaluation of parental role • From mother as primary caregiver towards equality of parents • “The parental couple survives the conjugal couple” (Villeneuve-Gokalp, 2009) • Changes in Belgian custody legislation (as in many Western countries) • 1995: Joint legal custody • 2006: Joint physical custody (as preferred residential model) • Joint custody: assumed beneficial effects on child well-being (Meta-analysis of Bausermann, 2002): • Maintaining parent-child relationship • More parental involvement • Better financial resources • Consequence: Increased number of children in bi-location, commuting between the household of mother and father after divorce = shared residence

  3. Consequences of joint physical custody • Be careful with a selection bias! Selection of higher social class-families into shared residence • Predictors of shared residence: • Higher income, higher educated parents • Lower parental conflict • Less children, more often boys • Studies about the effects of shared residence for the well-being of children are mostly based on the situation where the residence type was a “free choice” • In Belgium: “shared residence” became the standard. RESEARCH QUESTION: Did predictors of shared residence change due to legislative changes in 1995 and 2006?

  4. Data and sample • “Divorce in Flanders” dataset (19/07/10) • 1819 divorced individuals with at least one child at the time of the divorce • Independent observations • Random selection of one partner from each dissolved marriage • 801 fathers (44%) and 1018 mothers (56%) • Separated (started living separately) between 1973 and 2009 • Selected child: • Between 0 and 40 years old at time of separation (mean age: 9,4) • 954 boys (52%) and 865 girls (48%)

  5. Dependent variable: Residence type • Residence type at time of separation (unless temporary arrangement of one year or less)

  6. Independent variables Divorce cohort: based on year of starting living separately Educational level

  7. Independent variables Parental conflict How much conflict was there between you both after the decision to definitely break up? Give a number from 0 (no conflict) to 10 (a lot of conflict).

  8. Results: Incidence of joint physical custody Distribution (column %) of residence type per divorce cohort  Flexible residence omitted from further analyses Chi² = 68,19; p<0,0001

  9. Results: Factors associated with shared residence 1. Education of father Distribution (column %) of father’s educational level per residence type and divorce cohort

  10. Results: Factors associated with shared residence 2. Education of mother Distribution (column %) of mother’s educational level per residence type and divorce cohort

  11. Results: Factors associated with shared residence 3. Sex of the child Distribution (column %) of sex per residence type and divorce cohort

  12. Results: Factors associated with shared residence 4. Age of the child (at time of separation) Median age of children per residence type and divorce cohort

  13. Results: Factors associated with shared residence 5. Family size Distribution (%) of number of children per residence type and divorce cohort

  14. Results: Factors associated with shared residence 6. Conflict between ex-partners Distribution (%) of conflict level per residence type and divorce cohort

  15. Results: Change in predictors of shared residence *** p<0.001; ** p < 0.01; * p < 0.05; ° p < 0.10

  16. Summary of results Education of father • Before 1995: higher incidence of joint custody with high and middle educated fathers • After legislative changes in 1995 and 2006: effect of education decreased • Legislative changes have led to cumulative diffusion process of joint physical custody from high to low SES Age of the child at separation • Effect of age increased over time • Before 1995 no effect, after 1995, joint custody more often with younger children • Evidence that custody decisions are now more in the interest of the child? (Maintaining good parent-child relationship especially important with younger children) • Or measurement issue? Sex of the child • Before 2006 higher incidence of joint custody with boys (bivariate results) • After 2006: no association with sex of child • Joint custody used to be popular for higher educated fathers with sons!

  17. Summary of results Family size • Before 1995: lower incidence of joint custody in large families • Since 1995: effect of family size decreased • Confirmation for normalisation process: joint custody became the new standard, whatever the composition of the family Parental conflict • Before 1995: joint custody especially in low-conflict divorces • Since 1995  decreased association between conflict and joint custody • Since 2006: the opposite trend becomes visible: more joint custody in middle and high conflicted families (bivariate results). • Link with diffusion of joint custody to lower ses-families? • Joint custody as “victory” in court? “Having the children” as a goal? • Joint custody to avoid alimony payment?

  18. Discussion • What will be the consequences of the diffusion process regarding joint custody from high to low ses (and from low to high conflict couples), given the fact that joint custody • is an expensive arrangement (housing, transport, double equipment) • requires higher parental communication/cooperation skills • Are the positive effects of joint custody for children, reported in many research, conditional upon the socio-demographic profile of the parents (higher SES, lower conflict)? • Is it desireable that joint custody is ‘promoted’ by the law as standard model?

More Related