MichDads Blog

Category: Custody

Kids need both parents

I make no apologies for being a shared parenting advocate. As a family therapist, I've understood for years that kids need both parents. But in 2003, the clinical benefits that are achieved for children in shared parenting and the negative outcomes that often result when a parent is under involved became even more meaningful to me when my son was born.

Yet with all the research and understanding, a minute few still try and argue that the need for shared parenting somehow changes in a divorce or never married dynamic. Unfounded rationalizations include "schlepping from one house to the other is burdensome for kids and they'll do better if they have one primary home." Fact is, most family therapists and research concludes that as long as the environment is safe, predictable and consistent, children do fine in multiple environments. However, they do poorly when the frequency of contact with their parent is restricted to a visitor status and the voids then created tend to be acted out in highly destructive ways.

As a valued family clinician once told me early on in my case, a child's need for a healthy attachment and loving relationship with both parents trumps any need for one residence, neighborhood, etc. It takes real time to develop and maintain that sort of relationship. I've seen this truth illustrated in my child's life. He spends equal time between two homes that are 30 miles apart but he's thriving in every way. Not surprising, children, like adults, define relationships by the frequency of contact and quality of time they spend with someone so regardless of a marital status, it requires a quantity of time to authenticate a parental role. If you're being challenged in your legal ability to achieve something to that end, retain an experienced family law attorney who understands what the Michigan Parenting Time Guideline states:

Michigan statutes recognize that when parents separate or divorce, their children's best interests are served by continuation of the parent/child relationship. So strong is this recognition that the law establishes a presumption that it is in the best interests of a children to have strong relationships with both parents. Therefore, parenting time should be of a frequency, duration and type reasonably calculated to promote a strong relationship between the children and parent. The children have a right to parenting time unless the court determines on the record by clear and convincing evidence that parenting time would endanger the children's physical, mental or emotional health [MCL 722.27a].

Calculating parenting time in a frequency, duration and type that promotes strong relationships between children and their parents. Sounds like a novel idea, certainly nothing that requires sophisticated clinical training or legal brilliance, yet this remains the single most controversial aspect of divorce. One reason why is that some parents continue fighting by trying to use children as pawns to control and hurt the other parent.

Make no mistake about it, taking a willing parent out of the mix of parenting will ultimately hurt and scar your children.

Category: Custody

Reunited at last; Pierce Edwards comes home

Jeff Edwards is a happy and relieved dad. As noted in my Sept. 30 post, his ex-wife, who does not have custody of their 6-year-old son, Pierce, allegedly abducted their son in August. Jeff spent the next 11 grueling weeks trying to find Pierce, longing to be with him, protect him and know he was safe. Word finally came Nov. 1 that he was found safe in Greensboro, N.C.

Hats off to the FBI for organizing the efforts of so many, but it's the Greensboro Police Department that should be commended for finding Pierce and his mother, and bringing this matter to a happy ending. It was their diligence in linking one incident to another that led them to where Pierce and his mom were. It was also one unlikely but Good Samaritan who made the difference in leading the police to their location.

The most important thing is that Pierce is safe, back home with his dad and no longer living a fugitive lifestyle that no child can truly understand or should ever be made to endure. Pierce is bright and confident beyond his years, which no doubt helped him survive these last few months. His dad reports that although there is fallout from the experience, Pierce is recovering more easily and quickly than he ever thought he could.

Pierce's tenacity and longing to be with his dad has to do with Jeff's convictions to be there for his son, not only when the need is obvious, but also the time and effort he spent with him before this senseless ordeal occurred. Clearly, his dad's efforts helped to establish Pierce's confidence, will and understanding of the difference between truth and lies.

Parental alienation tactics are grounded in lies that are attempts to brainwash a child against their other parent. The only way children know the truth, however, is by experiencing it in a quantity of time that supports a quality of relationship. Thank God, and I know Jeff does, that he had was able to establish a deep and meaningful bond with his son. It was that bond and attachment that helped Pierce understand the truth and difference between what he understood his experiences with his dad to be vs. what he was being told they were over these last several weeks.

Press on Jeff. You're blessed to have such a good and brave little boy. Likewise, he's blessed to have you for a dad.

• More Images

Category: Custody

Do the courts care?

It seems I had heard it a million times from a million men, not a few furious, frustrated, fighting and sometimes, fainting fathers: "The courts don't care." But like so many other items of information that I considered irrelevant because they did not directly affect me, I dismissed these declarations of indifference, even unfriendliness at the Friend of the Court and Family Courts of Michigan, as frequently spoken, and thus, familiar, hearsay, but not necessarily fact.

Then that day, or rather that night, came. It was 8:15 pm. Three sheriff deputies showed up, dressed in black and, literally, dressed to kill, clad with clubs, guns and the like.

"Is Conderidge Smith here?", one officer asked.

"This is he," I answered. "Is something wrong?"

"You've been served" is all I was told. And just like that, the police put a piece of paper in my hand and departed as quickly and violently as they had come. The contest for my son commenced.

Since that time, I have been to court several times, pursuing impartial treatment in the form of joint physical custody and equal parenting time of my son. What has happened? I have been laughed at by lawyers, including my own. I have been told to settle by the same. One Friend of the Court officer asked my ex, instead of me, "How much does he make?" and asked me "Why do you want more time? Most men only get weekends." Then I was given a total of eight hours per week - four hours each Wednesday and Thursday. That's just enough time to pick up my son, pee and part from him again, all while he asks, "Am I spending the night?" and weeps when I tell him, "No, not this time, son".

When I complained about the schizophrenic schedule I was given, I was told by my lawyer at the time, "I fought for some extra time. You wanted it. I got it for you. Eight hours is good."

Today, to add insult to all my injuries, I was told by Elaine Bryant, a Family Counselor at the Oakland County Friend of the Court, that my son's constant crying at having to be taken back to his mother was "my problem" and my "choice" and "quite normal".

"Just because something is normal," I bit my lip to refrain from saying, "does not mean it is acceptable."

"Quite normal." Her casually conferred comment endlessly echoed in my ear, like a clanging cymbal smashed by a teenager in a fit of rage.

After all these dismissive, dumbfounding and ultimately discriminatory descriptions from the lips of those sworn to protect "the best interest of the child" (Michigan Child Custody Act, MCL 722.23), I have joined that host of hurt and, therefore, hurting men -- and weeping, and therefore, weary women -- who know from all too painful experience that the courts do not care.

Most cases concerning custody are settled in six minutes, according to James M. Alexander, an Oakland County Circuit Court judge in the family division at an orientation for divorced parents, i.e., SMILE (Start Making It Liveable for Everyone).

I think most kids are treated as heartless cases, rather than human faces with hurting hearts, fragile feelings and immature minds in a maze, trying to make sense of what is often senseless, selfish, sinister and sinful powerplaying from at least one parent who is more concerned about himself or herself than the child in the chains of the challenge of a lifetime.

Most women are assumed to be the most fit parent, and thus are given more time to parent than men. It seems most men are treated as court impostors, rather than co-parents deserving equal everything. They are told to pay child support, and sent, however un-merrily, on their way to weep and work - not necessarily so they may participate in the child's life, but so they can mandatorily pay child support or else, as if money is all the support a child needs from his or her father.

Add up all of this and the sum is this: While children are crying outside and dying inside from carelessly crafted custody agreements, court officials are operating on an assembly line of indifference toward the children and animosity toward fathers. Why? Because the courts do not care.