ILLINOIS DIVORCE LAW BLOG

While divorce proceedings may pose a great burden upon parents, they often have a significant affect upon children as well, who may not fully understand what is happening in the family’s transition. Parental separation can fundamentally shift a child’s world view, requiring careful steps to ensure that children are able to soundly cope with changes the divorce brings. It is crucial that parents remain focused upon helping children transition during the process:

1. Encourage open communication from your children. Although the complete scope of the process might immediately escape children, it’s important that you take time to allow a child to express his or her feelings about the event. This is a way in which you can both come to understand outside viewpoints, as well as providing you with an opportunity to reach and explain the situation in a manner that resonates with the child. If you have multiple children, it’s important to speak to them both individually and collectively, as each child is likely to have a different, personal response to the events unfolding, depending on their age and personality.

2. Ensure that all children have a stable social safety net throughout the process. Since the fundamental role of the family is to provide a safe setting in which children can learn and grow, it’s important that one continue to provide this level of support even during parental separation. Ensure that children are in a safe environment and remain outside any legal or argumentative environments that might surround the divorce; if you understand with your spouse around children, remain friendly and amicable, independent of your internal feelings. Always reach out to your broader, extended social network so that children feel comfortable – allow them to spend time with friends, relatives and counselors so that they have feelings of stability in spite of the changes around them.

There are at least five (5) states that have passed legislation regarding virtual visitation, or internet visitation: Utah, Wisconsin, Texas, Missouri and Florida. Other states are sure to follow, and through my firm’s nonprofit Fathers4Justice.net Illinois, I’m working to develop a legislative bill to propose making Virtual Visitation part of the IMDMA. Michael Gough, a pioneer virtual visitation technologist, has developed a program that we discussed in Chicago some years ago. See http://www.internetvisitation.org/

Internet visitation is being implemented, primarily for the purpose of allowing a parent more access to his or her child while the child is not in their care; it is not meant to replace one-on-one visitation. Think of it as a supplement to in person time with your child(ren).

Virtual visitation allows for the parent and child to communicate on a more regular basis, allowing for the parent and child to see and hear one another, which can be more effective than the standard telephone call. It seems that those adverse to virtual visitation are most concerned with parents using it as a means to replace typical in person visitation, which it is not meant to do.

Co-Parenting defined:

Co-parenting enables children to reap the benefits of being raised by both parents in the event of a divorce. The archaic belief that primary custody should always be awarded to the mother is in most jurisdictions not followed. Today, it is widely acknowledged that many good fathers are just as qualified to raise children as good mothers. Therefore, to benefit the children and save the divorcing couple thousands of dollars in litigation fees, thoughtful divorce lawyers encourage their clients to settle custody issues by agreeing to joint legal and physical custody: co-parenting.

Frequently, co-parenting plans will divide the time children spend with each parent relatively equally, providing each parent an opportunity to raise their children and enjoy spending large amounts of time with them as they grow up.

The State Of Iowa has on its books a Shared Parenting statute. which establishes shared parenting as the presumptively preferred means of custody in Iowa.

Here in Illinois, litigants often times fight custody “wars” over which parent will “win” the custody of the child(ren). As a lawyer and aggressive advocate for my clients, I enjoy a strongly contested case, but the fight over the custody of children is a battle that often should not be fought. Divorce creates enormous personal stresses in families, and the impact of divorce on children is well known. Having parents fight wars for the time with the children seems to me unhealthy, unnecessarily painful, and uselessly costly to families.

There are cases where joint physical custody is not appropriate. The Courts are well prepared to determine these cases. However, it would be a welcome event to see Illinois evolve out of the custody “dark ages,” into a more enlightened view toward statutory shared parenting. This would take the fight out of the parenting part of the case.

Below is a proposed Federal statute for shared parenting, from an Iowa shared parenting advocacy group:

Title of Bill:
An Act Relating to Physical Care of Children in Domestic Relations
Be It Enacted By The United States Congress
1 Preamble: An Act relating to joint physical care of children in domestic relations and
2 establishing a uniform federal law creating a rebuttable presumption that a request for joint 3 physical care is in the best interest of the child.
4 5 SECTION 1: This act may be cited as, “Shared Parenting bill.”
6
7 SECTION 2: In any domestic relations proceeding, the states shall award joint physical 8 care to both joint custodial parents upon the request of either parent during the proceedings 9 on the initial dissolution petition or during the proceedings on a modification of the original 10 custody order.
11 12 SECTION 3: A rebuttable presumption exists that a request for joint physical care by either 13 parent is in the best interest of the child, the burden of proof to rebut the presumption rests 14 on the party denying that joint physical care is in the best interest of the child, and such 15 party shall demonstrate that joint physical care is not in the best interest of the child by clear 16 and convincing evidence.
Continue reading →