Speaker 1: 0:00

Hi, this is your host, danielle. Welcome back to the Post-Separation Abuse Podcast. In last episode I talked about the critical choice between being conflict avoidant versus being protective and why you can't be both. If you haven't listened to that episode yet, I highly recommend that you go back and listen to that one first, because it really does set the foundation for everything that we're going to cover in this next series of podcasts Today.

Speaker 1: 0:24

I want to start by telling you about Sarah. She came to me after about six months of trying to make it work with an informal 50-50 shared care arrangement for her four-year-old son. Three different professionals a lawyer, a mediator and a parenting coach had all told her that this arrangement was quote-unquote fair and quote, quote unquote in her son's best interests. But Sarah knew that something was wrong. Her son was having frequent meltdowns after transitions, was no longer sleeping in the same settled way that he once had, had started wanting to co-sleep with her again, which was something that had not occurred for quite some time. He had started clinging to Sarah desperately whenever he knew that a changeover was coming. When Sarah expressed her concerns to professionals, she was ultimately left feeling that she was being difficult and that she needed to just give it more time that her son would eventually adjust that kids are quote-unquote resilient. One professional even suggested to Sarah that she was the one experiencing separation anxiety Not Sarah's son, but herself. Here's the thing Sarah wasn't experiencing separation anxiety. She was experiencing protective parental instincts. Her son was showing signs of distress and this informal 50-50 arrangement was completely inappropriate for a four-year-old's developmental needs. But none of the professionals that Sarah had spoken to truly understood child development well enough to recognise any of this. This is the problem that we need to talk about today. I really wish that Sarah's situation was one of a kind, but it's not. I've had countless protective parents come to me with very, very similar stories.

Speaker 1: 2:12

Unfortunately, most professionals working in the separation and divorce space are giving advice that sounds really reasonable on the surface but is fundamentally flawed because it ignores what we actually know about children's developmental needs. So let's break down the main categories of professionals that you're likely to encounter after separation. Number one family lawyers. They understand family law, but typically nothing to do with child psychology. They focus on what's legally possible, oftentimes over and above what's actually developmentally appropriate for your child. The primary goal of many legal professionals often seems to be to come to an agreement, any agreement that will avoid court, even if that agreement ultimately harms the children involved. They're trained in particular legal principles, but they're not trained in attachment theory or child development.

Speaker 1: 3:10

Then there's mediators and family dispute resolution practitioners, whose job it is primarily to get parents to come to agreement. They're not there to determine what's actually best for the children involved. They're there to facilitate compromise. They often operate under the assumption that any agreement both parents agree to must be acceptable, regardless of whether it really serves the children's needs. Then we've got generic coaches who treat every family situation as if it's more or less the same. They sometimes give communication scripts and conflict resolution strategies without really understanding that some situations involve safety concerns that really cannot be resolved just with quote-unquote better communication. They often assume that all conflict is equal and that both parents are ultimately equally capable and safe. Then we have family therapists or counsellors who might understand adult relationships but often lack specific expertise in child development, attachment theory, trauma and the nuances of family violence and post-separation abuse dynamics. They often default to wanting everyone to simply get along, without really understanding that sometimes protecting children requires actually not getting along with an unsafe parent.

Speaker 1: 4:31

Here's what's really concerning so many of these professionals operate under myths that are not at all supported by research or evidence. Let me walk you through some of the most dangerous ones. Myth number one that equal time is the gold standard and is good for children. This myth completely ignores everything that we know about attachment theory and child development. Young children form hierarchical attachment relationships, not equal ones. They need a primary, secure base, and this is particularly true for children around four years of age and under. Research from Australia's own government studies shows that high frequency overnight arrangements for very young children can significantly harm their emotional development and attachment security. This myth that equal time is somehow the gold standard and is ideal completely ignores the research.

Speaker 1: 5:28

Myth number two is that your kids just need you both to get along. This myth assumes that all conflict is the same, and it ignores situations where one parent poses a genuine risk to the children's well-being. Sometimes, what professionals label as quote-unquote conflict is actually a protective parent attempting to protect the children from abuse, neglect or other harmful behavior. Telling a protective parent that they just need to communicate better with an abusive former partner is not going to solve the problem and may actually make it worse. It completely invalidates a protective parent's experience. Myth number three is that time heals all wounds. Children are resilient and they'll adjust. This dangerous assumption means that inappropriate arrangements can continue causing harm while everyone just simply waits for the kids to get used to it. Some arrangements cause developmental damage that will not resolve with time. A two-year-old forced into overnight care arrangements doesn't eventually quote-unquote adjust. They often develop serious attachment disruptions that can impact them for years, even into adulthood.

Speaker 1: 6:43

Myth number four is that parents' rights are equal, so the arrangements, the parenting time, should be equal. This completely misses the point that, as far as I'm concerned, children have rights, not parents. Parents have responsibilities. I'll say that again. The way that I work with clients is from a foundation that the children have the rights and the parents have the responsibilities. So in situations where there might be more or less shared decision-making, it's then assumed, with this myth, that the parenting arrangements should then be equal. Now, thankfully, there's far more scope for this problematic myth, for this problematic thinking, to change, given that the Family Law Act was changed in 2024, removing the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility, which is the decision-making component of parenting. However, this pervasive myth still exists within the community and, sadly, with professionals as well, focusing on arrangements being equal if decision-making is equal, completely misses the point that parenting arrangements should be based on children's needs, not parents' perceived rights or entitlements. Children are not chattel. They are not property to be divided equally between adults. The focus should always be on what best supports children's development and well-being, not on what is perceived to be quote-unquote, fair to the adults involved.

Speaker 1: 8:18

Myth number five is that keeping kids connected to both parents is the gold standard and is always worth the risk. This ignores the reality that some parents are genuinely neglectful, unsafe or, in other ways, harmful. Sometimes no relationship with a parent is much better than a forced relationship that forms some kind of ongoing harm or trauma. Quality always matters far more than quantity, and forced contact with an abusive or neglectful parent does not benefit children. So why do so many professionals get it wrong? Why are there still so many perpetuating these harmful myths?

Speaker 1: 9:02

There are several reasons. Number one there is a lack of specialized training. Most lawyers, even though specializing in family law, are focused on the law, not child development. Most mediators learn conflict resolution, not attachment theory. Counselors, family consultants, family therapists, primarily learn about adult relationships, not about the nuances of family violence and how that impacts children's development when they're going between caregivers. Number two there is often a lot of systemic pressure to avoid court. The entire system is inherently set up to encourage agreements, even bad ones. Courts around the world are overwhelmed and Australia is no different, so there's enormous pressure on professionals to get parents to agree to something anything rather than fighting for what children actually need.

Speaker 1: 9:54

There's also a fear of being seen as biased. Many professionals are so afraid of appearing to favour one parent over the other that they default to very neutral, balanced, equal arrangements, even when those arrangements are developmentally inappropriate. They commonly mistake fairness between adults for what's best for kids. There's also an incredible lack of understanding of family violence and post-separation abuse dynamics. Most professionals working in this space don't understand how coercive control works, how it can continue after separation, how it often continues after separation, how it often continues even after there are parenting orders, and they have limited understanding as to how it truly affects children.

Speaker 1: 10:44

Mothers expressing protective concerns are often painted as being difficult, rather than a professional recognising that she's responding to real harm that is being caused to the children. There's often a belief amongst professionals that simply wrapping up the parenting arrangements, the court process, getting an agreement in place, getting orders in place that the conflict is just going to die a natural death all of its own, irrespective of even, in some cases, extensive family violence, extensive coercive control, extensive post-separation abuse. Seriously, it baffles the mind. The idea that a coercive controlling former partner is just going to wake up and decide no longer to be controlling because there's parenting orders in place is, frankly, fucking laughable. There can also be professional liability concerns or professional reputation concerns. Some professionals give generic wishy-washy advice because it can feel safer to recommend significant time or equal time to a parent than to spend time making nuanced decisions based on individual family circumstances and genuine need from children.

Speaker 1: 12:01

Time and time again I have clients coming to me telling me about the recommendations for report writers that their lawyers have given them and their lawyers telling them oh yes, you know, this person's very well respected, very well respected. What does that well respected often end up meaning? Neutral, balanced recommendations that completely disregard the age and specific needs of children, the history of family violence, the ongoing pervasiveness of coercive control. I could go on, but you get the idea. So what should drive post-separation parenting decisions instead of these harmful myths? Three main things. Number one child development science. What do we actually know about how children form attachments, process stress and develop emotional regulation. The reality is that a six-month-old has completely different needs from a six-year-old and a six-year-old has different needs from a 16-year-old. Yet there are many professionals that ignore these crucial differences.

Speaker 1: 13:01

We need to take into account individual family circumstances. Has there been family violence, substance abuse, mental health issues affecting parenting capacity? What are the established caregiving patterns? Who have the children actually been turning to consistently for comfort, safety and daily care? One size all does not fit all families. We also need to be taking into account children's expressed needs. Not just simply what children say, because young children often can't articulate their needs, but what their behaviour tells us.

Speaker 1: 13:34

Children communicate distress in many ways. A two, three or four year old who's having meltdowns after every transition is telling us something important about their experience. Sometimes it's not as dramatic as a meltdown. Sometimes it is a change in appetite, a change in sleeping patterns, a change in persistence with new activities. Distress can be communicated in a variety of different ways. When we start from the foundation of looking at these things that should be driving the parenting decisions, the child development science, the individual family circumstances and children's expressed needs again, not just what they're saying, but what their behavior is telling us. When we start from this foundation instead of legal concepts, adult convenience or adult concepts of fairness, the appropriate arrangements often become so much clearer. Here's why this matters so much.

Speaker 1: 14:31

Getting the parenting arrangements wrong doesn't just cause temporary inconvenience. It can cause lasting damage to children's emotional development, their sense of security, their ability to regulate their emotions, not just in childhood but also beyond, and their relationship, ultimately, with both of their parents. And once inappropriate arrangements are established, even informally, they can become incredibly difficult to change. Australian family law tends to give significant weight to the status quo, which means that arrangements recommended by perhaps well-meaning but incredibly uninformed professionals can become very entrenched. This is why it's crucial to get evidence-based advice from the beginning, rather than trying to fix problems later, after the damage has already been done. Sarah's story had a better ending, by the way, once she started working with me and we spoke about the research about children's developmental needs, and I was able to guide her on how to have conversations not just with her co-parent but also with legal professionals. She was ultimately able to advocate confidently and credibly, for more appropriate arrangements. She was successful in optimising the outcome for both her son and herself, and he's now thriving in parenting arrangements that actually genuinely support his development, his best interests and his overall wellbeing.

Speaker 1: 15:53

So what can you do right now If you're feeling frustrated by professional advice that doesn't feel right for your children? Here's what I encourage you to do. First, trust your parental instincts. If something feels wrong for your kids, it probably is. You know your children better than any professional. Second, start asking better questions. Instead of asking what's fair, ask what does my child actually need developmentally. Instead of how can I avoid conflict, ask how can I best protect my child's well-being and development. Third, seek out professionals who understand child development, not just family law or conflict resolution. Look for people who can explain why certain arrangements work or don't work for children at different ages. Look for people who can explain why certain arrangements support your child or children developmentally. Fourth, educate yourself about child development and attachment theory. The more you understand about what children genuinely need, the better equipped you'll be to evaluate professional advice and advocate effectively for appropriate parenting arrangements.

Speaker 1: 17:11

Over the coming weeks I'm going to dive deeper into specific issues. I'll be talking more about why the myths around equal shared parenting time or 50-50 is so dangerous for many children. How to recognize when keeping the pieces actually hanging onto harm and why your children's age should completely change how you think about parenting arrangements. But here's what I want you to know right now You're not crazy for questioning advice that just simply doesn't feel right. You're not being difficult for advocating for your children's genuine needs, and you're not alone in feeling frustrated by professionals who should be helping but seem to be making things worse.

Speaker 1: 17:52

The solution isn't learning to communicate better with an unsafe former partner or accepting harmful arrangements to avoid conflict or being seen as difficult. The solution is making decisions based on evidence, child development research and your children's genuine needs, rather than adult concepts of fairness or convenience. If what I've shared today resonates with you, I want you to know that I'm developing comprehensive guidance that will give you the evidence-based information you need to make confident decisions about your children's future. The Post-Separation Parenting Blueprint launching in September 2025, will cover everything that we've talked about today and much more. You'll learn what children actually need at each developmental stage, how to evaluate the professional advice, how to advocate effectively in the legal system and how to create arrangements that truly serve your children's well-being and best interests.

Speaker 1: 18:47

Go to the website danielleblackcoachingcomau or the link in the show notes to join the waitlist to be the first to know when the blueprint is live. You'll get exclusive early bird pricing when you join the wait list and also access to resources that can help you to start making child-focused decisions immediately. Don't let another week pass you by accepting advice that does not serve your children. They deserve better, and so do you. Thank you so much for listening. I'll be back next week diving into some dangerous myths that might be affecting your family right now, specifically around equal shared parenting time. Talk to you soon.