Cougars, cubs, and storks

[redfyre]

Originally Posted by sealion

well there is the presumption about bonding etc. being right from the womb, but I'm not so sure about that (in the extreme case) lets say the kid was taken right at birth to someone else then would the kid still have a bond with the biological mother.

In this day and age, the courts system is still a bit behind, and based on precedent still awards custody to the mother often even in times when the father might be more suitable. Thus the kid ending up with the mother more often may not always be because the mother is more suitable but because of precedent so to speak. Exerting paternity rights is actually pretty tough.

Essentially a baby bonds to its primary caregiver. This is in the vast majority of cases, the birth mother. Recent studies have proven that in the case of parental separation, a child will thrive as long as they spend the majority of time with the primary attachment figure. Quantity of time spent with secondary attachment figure is almost irrelevant - quality of time is proven to be most important. In some cases ( a minority) the primary attachment figure is the father. I should state here, no one is stopping fathers from being the primary attachment figure - it is generally gender role fulfillment that leads to this ratio. As a side note, studies on children placed in long term day care from early in life (around three months) have demonstrated statistically significant higher numbers of attachment disorders (i.e. they lack ANY primary attachment figure).

If someone was to study the actual court statistics, they would find that in adjudicated custody issues - as opposed to parenting arrangement made outside the court system - mothers are NOT the favoured parenting gender. Judicial systems in many western countries favour the equally shared parenting model (which cutting edge research has proven to be extremely flawed) but the behind-the-times judiciary (that part is right) takes quite a few years to catch up with research. For example, the now thoroughly discredited Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) cited in many custody disputes where sexual abuse was at issue (resulting in far too many children being placed in full custody with the abusive parent) still resonates in many judiciaries.

Most court adjudicated custody disputes arise in high conflict cases; eg primarily where domestic violence has been a feature of the spousal relationship. But these represent a small proportion of custodial outcomes. The majority by far, are arrived at by private arrangement (sometimes mediated) between the two parents. And most of those do allocate the children to the mother's primary care, most usually because she was primary carer prior to the end of the spousal relationship. But those agreements ARE voluntarily arrived at.

I take issue with the concept of parental rights (either gender) as opposed to the concept of parental responsibilities. Children are not time-shares. Child-rearing is a long term job, and it is hard and demanding, although there are undeniable benefits. Shared parenting can only work where both parents are equally committed to their children's welfare, and have an amicable relationship despite separation. However, too often, specifically in cases of domestic violence, the abusive parent seeks primary - often sole custody - simply as a means to continue to control and/or punish the other parent. Courts are woefully undereducated in understanding the dynamics of domestic violence as well. Including the fact that most abusers are extremely skilled at presenting themselves to outsiders as "good people". This has led to the popular myths that cloud the whole disputed custody issues. It is not surprising that society in general is confused by this, when so many people in the court system are poorly educated in this area.

Incidentally, shared parenting arrangements often start to fall apart in the child's teenage years, as the child matures and begins to seek independence from all parenting constraints. When both parents wish to assert their "rights" to equal time, this can result in a different kind of adjudication - where the child themselves asserts their right to choose their primary parent. Interestingly enough, many times, it is the most authoritative (structured, balanced) parent who is the preferred; not the "fun" parent (there is always one).

[sealion]

I'm interested in your observations. can you provide citations in your statistics on the adjudicated rights as there may discussion on that.
for instance

Custody For Fathers
(i'm in a bit of a rush at the moment but will be back later tonight).

(btw earlier what I was questioning earlier was the what I perceived to be a claim that by simply being in the womb the child has an instantaneous mental bond with the mother)

[andrew101]

contextual bump

[cherryaa]

Grinning (slow coach! )