Post‐Separation Parenting Time Schedules in Joint Physical Custody Arrangements

Abstract

Objective The objective of the study was to examine patterns of parenting time schedules in joint physical custody (JPC) arrangements. Background Although the importance of contact with the non‐residential parent for children's well‐being after family dissolution is well‐documented, the measures used in surveys are often crude and do not capture the two dimensions of post‐separation parenting time schedules: the proportion of time children spend with each parent and the number of transitions children make between parental homes. Method The analyses are based on the Family Models in Germany study, a German sample of families with children aged 0–14 that was conducted in 2019. As this study includes a residential calendar capturing the children's stays with each parent over 4 weeks, it was possible to calculate both dimensions of post‐separation parenting time schedules for 463 JPC families. Results The results revealed that 55.5% of JPC families practiced an asymmetric (at least 30% with one parent) and 44.5% practiced a symmetric care arrangement (50% with each parent). The mean number of transitions children experienced was 9.5 within a month. The factors that were found to be positively associated with practicing symmetric JPC were working hours of the responding parent and parents' relationship quality. However, working hours of the responding parent and the distance between the parents' homes reduced the number of transitions between the parents' homes, whereas a good parental relationship increased them. Conclusion Empirical investigations of children in post‐separation families should take the two dimensions of physical custody into account.

Parenting Styles, Coparenting, and Early Child Adjustment in Separated Families with Child Physical Custody Processes Ongoing in Family Court

“…However, it must always be submitted to the Family and Minors Court for approval or hearing, if necessary, except family circumstances in which it is not possible or when it is not in the best interests of the child. Notwithstanding this, household arrangements remain asymmetric as in other western countries [33,39]. Even with equivalent groups of sole and joint psychical custody, the distribution of the number of days with fewer days spent with the father follows that found in earlier studies Based on attachment to the mothers, children under three are traditionally in sole custody, spending fewer overnights with the father, thus overlooking attachment to fathers or father involvement [14,55].…”

“…Even in joint physical custody, asymmetric care arrangements and overnights are more frequent. The quality of interparental relationship and the parents' working hours was found to positively predict symmetric joint physical custody plans [33]. Some studies found equal levels of well-being in children from both types of child physical custody, similar to those from non-separated families [17,31,34] or sole vs. joint physical custody, emphasizing the role of low parental psychopathology and high parenting and coparenting [35].…”

“…We intended to explore the effects of parenting styles and negative coparenting on psychosocial adjustment of young children of separated parents with an ongoing litigation or friendly child physical custody process in family court. Postseparation interparental conflict is relevant for the child's mental health in both custody arrangements [33,37]. First, we intended to describe child adjustment at a young age in the middle of a custody process in court, which is a sensitive post separation phase bound to increase interparental conflict.…”

Children’s well-being in sole and joint physical custody families.

“…Children living in SPC arrangements spent less than 30% with either their mother or their father (with the other parent being the residential parent), and children living in JPC arrangements spent between 30% and 50% of their time with both their mother and their father. We did not differentiate between days and nights but calculated the total amount of time that the child spent with either parent (see also Steinbach & Augustijn, 2021).…”

Mothers’ Economic Well-Being in Sole and Joint Physical Custody Families

“…Scholars have attributed this relationship to the additional costs that are associated with practicing joint physical custody (Cancian et al, 2014;Poortman & van Gaalen, 2017), including the costs of maintaining two suitable homes and having two sets of furniture, clothes, and toys for the children (Bakker & Mulder, 2013). Moreover, because there is some evidence that joint physical custody is associated with frequent transitions between the parents' households (Steinbach & Augustijn, 2021), this care arrangement may also involve higher travel costs (Vanassche et al, 2017), especially when the parents live far away from each other.…”