Thoughts on Shared Parenting Presumptions (Part 2/4)
© 2013 By Bill Eddy, LCSW, Esq. Thoughts on Shared Parenting Presumptions (Part 2/4) Different Needs at Different Ages Birth to age 5: Generally, this is a period when children need lots of stability and “secure attachment” experiences with both parents. Generally, it appears best to have one parent with the majority of the time and the other parent having frequent access, although this doesn’t have to be long to be beneficial for this age child. It’s the frequency that matters. For various reasons, biological and historical, mothers have had the majority of time during these years, although fathers have been very actively and successfully involved as long as they didn’t undermine the development of a secure attachment with the mother. The most important part is that the child has a secure attachment with both parents, regardless of time: that they are predictable, consistent and emotionally available when they are with the child. I agree with the majority of researchers I have read over the past thirty years, such as the following comments in the introduction to a journal on the subject of child attachment in divorce: One widespread view shared by this Issue’s contributors is that children should be assigned to the primary custody of one parenting figure (whether mother or father) across approximately the first three years of life…. Such a position – if taken consistently by the court – should contribute to the alleviation of this often central focus of parental stress, confusion and contentiousness. In addition, many papers in this Issue may also serve to reduce the worries of the ‘visiting’ parent via an understanding that his or her relationship during infancy and toddlerhood need not ultimately be ‘secondary’ in any important sense. Thus, so long as the ‘visiting’ parent can maintain regularity of contact which involves lively, sensitive interactions with the child, the child’s opportunity for forming a full and secure attachment to that parent will remain intact. Judges informed by these views can (a) alleviate the strain incurred by both parents engaged in a well-meaning but untoward attempts at designing ‘half-and-half’ early care arrangements; and (b) reassure the ‘secondary’, ‘visiting’ parent that his/her opportunity for establishing a full relationship with the child need not be compromised. Attachment Theory and Research, Main et al., Family Court Review, Vol. 49 No. 3, July 2011 (426-463), 427. When my clients are the parents with much less parenting time during this period, I reassure them that these early years are laying the groundwork for all future relationships for the child, so that having stability and security of contact for the child with the other parent will benefit my client in developing a relationship later on of equal significance, whether or not there is equal time later on. In some of my cases, it has been the father who has had the majority of this parenting time and the child has developed quite a secure primary attachment. However, most of the time it has been the mother and there is some research that reinforces the biological precedent for this – from pregnancy to children having more neurons for processing a woman’s voice in early childhood. In either case, it is more important that the child have at least one consistently secure attachment at this age, than to have two insecure attachments with parents who are undermining each other. Of course, if the primary parent is seriously disturbed then he or she should have much less than 50% of the parenting time so that the other parent (assuming he or she is less disturbed) can provide a secure primary attachment. However, in general, both parents can have secure attachments during this age period, even if one has a lot more time than the other. It’s the interactive quality and consistency of the relationship that makes it secure or not, not the amount of time. A presumption for equal shared parenting time during these early years could undermine the child’s ability to develop a secure attachment with either parent and thereby undermine his or her sense of security and long-term personality development (insecure early childhood attachment appears to be one of the main factors in developing adult personality disorders). Age 5-12: Generally, this is the age range when children seem to do fine with relatively equal shared parenting. There are a variety of schedules (2-2-5-5; alternate weeks – with a mid-week visit with the other parent; etc.) that seem to work, so long as the parents both support the schedule. If they don’t both support the schedule, then it’s easy to make this fail. (I’ve seen many cases where one parent who is uncomfortable with the schedule says “it’s too many back-and-forths” or “too long away.” Then the child appears to absorb this parent’s concern and makes the exact same complaints – even though many other children with relaxed parents seem to do fine with these schedules.) The key here is that these are cooperative parents, and that their children have been raised with both parents actively involved. There are many other children who experience significant distress by having a shared parenting schedule, who are much happier to have a primary parent (65% or more) and less time with the other parent. Fighting against such a schedule usually increases the child’s anxiety, rather than increasing their happiness. Of course, there are some cases (domestic violence, alienation, etc.) in which I have encouraged a “noncustodial” parent to fight for a change in custody because the primary parent has had serious behavior problems. But if the effort has not succeeded after a year or two, I have advised many parents to stop the fight if they have at least 25% of the parenting time, as it will not help the child to be raised in the context of an endless battle. I have had several cases in which the noncustodial parent developed a much stronger relationship after the child turned 18 or 20, because they had stopped the battle years before when
Can Borderlines Share Parenting?
Response to Article: Can Borderlines Share Parenting? © 2013 By Bill Eddy, LCSW, Esq. In 2010, when my book Don’t Alienate the Kids! Raising Resilient Children While Avoiding High Conflict Divorce was published, I wrote a blog titled: Can Borderlines Share Parenting? Since then I have had over 50 blog comments covering the range of difficulties and thoughtful ways to manage them, when co-parenting with someone with borderline personality disorder (BPD). New comments are still being posted. The most recent one made some good points that I thought I’d share with everyone below. In a day or two, I’ll re-post my original blog on this topic, if anyone wants to see it and comment. Anonymous said… Hi, I hate always reading negative stories about BPD. I am a father of one 5-year-old boy and yes, I struggled immensely with unstable emotions. However, I think each should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. I have been seeking help and in therapy for over 2 years and take mood-stabilizing medication. I have overcome many of the problems I had and am a full-time student in a University who just completed a BA in psychology with a 3.81 GPA. I was also accepted to grad school as a school psychologist and will be working directly with children. Despite BPD being extremely difficult and an affliction I’ll likely live with till I die, there are exceptions and there are people that succeed at parenting. It is the knowledge of what I was missing as a child, the love and unconditional support that makes them especially salient messages between me and my child. I don’t want him to go through what I did which makes me all the more invested. I do worry however that if I lost custody or he was taken away how I would handle it. In my experience that’s what makes a BPD vulnerable is that they feel that everyone leaves them, and it can feel devastating and reaffirm deep-seated feelings of shame. Shame differs from guilt in that it focuses on the individual rather than the behavior; to feel unworthy of being happy or being loved. Can you imagine feeling like that? That what you most deeply desire as a social animal is out of reach for you? To be loved, needed, accepted? Just keep in mind this originates in childhood, with parents that are supposed to convey love and security leave you instead associating those feelings with fear and anxiety. UGH! Like the last comment that was on [this original blog on this topic], people are individuals. If someone is an alcoholic, it doesn’t mean that they drink till they pass out. It’s different for each individual and is affected by environment. Most of the people on [the original blog] seem to have as black-and-white thinking as I supposedly do. Life is not a binary people, but a spectrum and subject to environment and number of resources. Anyone with BPD should look into Compassion Focused Therapy, as well as anyone seeking a deeper understanding of human emotions and motivations. [June 22, 2013] Bill Eddy said… Dear Anonymous, I’m so glad you left your comment and helped explain what its like for someone struggling with managing and overcoming this problem. You are to be congratulated on your efforts to manage your emotions and your successes. You are right that childhood should be a time of love and guidance, not shame and blame. You make a good point about avoiding black and white thinking. We’re all learning! Best wishes, Bill Eddy. [June 23, 2013] In my book published in July 2010 (Don’t Alienate the Kids!), I suggest that it is important for children to have two parents – especially to prevent child alienation which can lead to difficulties in adult relationships. This means shared parenting in separation or divorce, even with a parent with a personality disorder, including borderline personality disorder (BPD). Of course, safety issues must be addressed, to protect children from physical abuse, sexual abuse, neglect and emotional abuse. In some cases, this means supervised visitation, but in most cases this is not realistic or necessary. This means that there may be more time with a reasonable parent, or even equal parenting time. But this is not an easy question. I have had cases as a therapist and as a family law attorney in which a Borderline has attempted suicide after losing a custody hearing. I have had cases in which a Borderline left town after losing primary physical custody. It is very hard for a Borderline to share parenting, because of their all-or-nothing thinking. Yet to exclude a Borderline parent is to teach children that all-or-nothing parenting is appropriate. And to seek court orders that exclude a Borderline parent, or takes away primary physical custody from a Borderline, just feeds a high-conflict battle that goes on for years. This is especially true because family courts are generally uninformed about personality disorders, and the adversarial setting reinforces extreme behaviors while minimizing mental disorders. Borderlines (and I use this term to indicate a condition, not a whole person – just like an alcoholic or diabetic) typically share their all-or-nothing thinking repeatedly with their children, and the DSM-IV (the manual used by mental health professionals) says that the children of Borderlines have a 5 times greater chance of developing borderline personality disorder (BPD) themselves. This means that shared parenting with a Borderline requires a very reasonable other parent, who can teach the children lessons that will help them not develop the disorder themselves – lessons such as flexible thinking, managed emotions and moderate behaviors. I have had a few cases where this did work, even in a 50-50 arrangement. In some cases, the Borderline has had 60% of the parenting time. In others, the Borderline has had a much smaller percentage, such as 15%, but it has been stable after a lot of work and clear court orders. I am interested in the points of view of parents who are
How to Survive the Holidays with an Antisocial Relative
© 2012 By Bill Eddy, LCSW, Esq. [excerpted from It’s All Your Fault! by Bill Eddy] Don’t Get Conned While Antisocial “Con Artists” are the best at lying and manipulating information, all of the High Conflict Personalities lie some of the time. In your everyday life, from now on, you’re wise to be a little more cautious with the information you believe—especially from strangers. Handling Antisocial HCPs 1. Be alert for unusual stories that require you to do something. We naturally believe people who tell us they were victimized. The key point with Antisocials is that they want something from you. They’ll say anything to get it. If someone’s story requires you to make a leap of faith and make a donation or put your energy into something unfamiliar, say “I’ll think about it”—and get more information. 2. Pay attention to your gut feelings. Antisocials will seek and find your soft spots. You’ll feel uncomfortable around them before you consciously know why. Pay attention to your gut feelings and feel free to ask questions. They’ll use many clever and fast words to distract you from your doubts about what they’re saying. They’ll try to put the burden on you, but only if you let them. 3. Be skeptical when anybody tells you someone else is an evil monster. Antisocials are constantly blaming others for terrible deeds that didn’t occur, or at least not the way they describe them. Decide for yourself whether someone is not trustworthy, dangerous, or has made dramatic threats. Consider the source. People who speak in extremes are often projecting their own negative viewpoint onto others. People “get it backwards” more often than you realize. 4. HCPs have distortions much of the time and lie some of the time. This should be obvious, but people get fooled every day. There are people who will knowingly hurt you. Others honestly believe what they’re saying, but it’s false information. Be aware that this occurs. 5. Remind yourself every day to maintain a healthy skepticism. When we get fooled, most of the time it occurs because we didn’t consider that this nice person could be insincere with us. HCPs are often in a lot of pain (with Internal Upsets) and very emotionally persuasive. It helps to remind yourself that you can be easily misled. Antisocial Con Artists chronically spin tales of being abused by their victims. Don’t be misled. While the holidays can be a stressful time, arming yourself with knowledge will go along way toward helping you deal with this type of HCP and ensure that your season is a bright one. BILL EDDY, LCSW, ESQ. is the co-founder and Innovation Director of the High Conflict Institute in San Diego, California. He pioneered the High Conflict Personality Theory (HCP) and is viewed globally as the leading expert on managing disputes involving people with high-conflict personalities. He has written more than twenty books on the topic, developed methods for managing high-conflict disputes, and has taught professionals in the U.S. and more than ten countries. He is also co-host of the popular podcast, It’s All Your Fault, and writes a popular blog on Psychology Today.