Advocacy for the children

I introduced and made a case for the "Approximation Standard" in my last blog, and am back to discuss this and a few other things. I assert again that the approximation standard would be an excellent tool in determining what custody arrangement would be most beneficial for the children after divorce. In my view, this could easily be the only consideration, however there are times when the existing arrangement is not plausible in the post-divorce situation so changes do have to be made. This is where an advocate must be consulted. Here are my thoughts:

I am a strong proponent of child advocacy in divorce. It just makes sense. A child advocate needs to not only be educated in psychology and sociology, but also have experience in the education field. An individual with an education and background in Social Work alone would not cut it if I wrote the qualifications for the job. Seasoned teachers, and I mean those with 15+ years in the classroom, teaching grades 4-8 would probably be the best child advocates money could buy. Why? Because they know kids. Teachers see our children more than we do- they watch them from the time they arrive in the mornings until they leave in the afternoons. They watch them interacting with other children. They monitor and evaluate their progress. Teachers see the product of custody battles and shared custody, the stress, the poor performance in school, changes in appearance, attitude and habits. Teachers see the notes, "Johnny was at his dad's last week, I do not know what is going on but Johnny does not do any homework while at dad's." Of course the note from Johnny's dad reads, "Johnny was at mom's this week and she does not make him study, I do not know what is going on over there, I can only do so much." Teachers see the toll that being at the centre of a bitter custody battle can take on children.

Teachers can read children, it is part of their job, and after 15-20 years of doing this, they have been exposed to thousands of children and parents. There is not much a teacher has not seen after being "in the trenches" for 20 years. Career teachers know how to keep meticulous records, and can present information in very effective ways, making them superior candidates to be child advocates in the court system. Currently child advocates in the court system are social workers, and in some jurisdictions, child psychologists. The problem is that an advocate typically only has one meeting with the child before filing their report with the judge. Advocacy should entail more than one 45 minute meeting.

My best friend, who I have mentioned before and will likely mention again, begged the court for an advocate for the children in her case. Her children exhibited all of the signs of children in crisis, and no matter what she did, what she said, what she filed with the court to support her assertion that an advocate for the children was needed, the Judge refused. These children went from straight A's in school, to C's and D's, and the older child was making F's and almost failed his 8th grade year at school. The younger child sat in class drawing pictures of him and his mom together, and he would cry. Even his teacher expressed concern, but none of these facts swayed the Judge. In fact, when she took the children's school records in to the court, the Judge refused to review them, calling school records "inadmissible." Everyone was completely flabbergasted that the Judge was not willing to do anything for these children. She has been fighting the corruption in the court, fighting for her children, for the past 5 years and she continues to fight. I am not much for prayer, but I pray for her and her children as divine intervention seems the only way she will get relief.

So if Judge's are not relying on advocates or the Approximation Standard when making decisions about the children, how do they come to their decisions? Sometimes decisions on custody are a direct result of which parent has the better lawyer. Parental conduct is usually the weapon of choice, but there is a concept in the family courts, The Nexus Test, that could stop all of that nonsense. The Nexus Test stipulates there must be a nexus (or relationship if you will) between the conduct of the parent and the effect that this conduct has on a child. Infidelity is commonly used as a reason to take children away, especially if the cheater is the mother. An unfaithful spouse does not equal a bad parent, unless a connection can be made between the two, which is a leap not even Evel Knievel could make. The Nexus Test really came to light when gay and lesbian parents were fighting for custody of children. The American Psychological Association's position is that the sexual orientation of a parent does not have any negative impact on the child or the ability to parent. The concept was bastardized to include parental behaviour, not simply sexual preference. This "Nexus Test" should (and I stress "should") remove all of the 'he said, she said, he did, she did' from the divorce, and put the focus firmly on what is going to be the least traumatic for the child involved. Will this ever happen? Can divorce involving children ever go smoothly? All of the fighting in the court, is it about the children or the ego? When a child is taken out of their home, their school, their comfort zone and put into an unfamiliar situation, causing this child stress and upset, is there a winner?

Tune in next time when I will pontificate further on the problems and solutions plaguing our family court system.