Speaker 1: 0:01

Hello and welcome back to the Post-Separation Abuse Podcast. I'm your host, danielle Black. I want to start today with a question that might challenge everything that you have been told. What if the arrangement that everyone seems to think is quote best for children, or fair for children, or the ideal or the gold standard? What if that arrangement is actually harming them? Yes, I'm talking about 50-50 shared parenting time. Anyone who knows me, who's listened to the podcast, who works with me one-on-one, who has listened to my story, who has listened to my story that is, podcast episode number 56, knows that I have some issues with equal shared parenting time. What if those arrangements those 50-50 equal shared care arrangements that so many lawyers suggest and recommend and demand and push for on behalf of entitled clients, that mediators push for, that well-meaning friends and family suggest, that the community seems to think is just the norm and the default, that even, unfortunately, single expert witnesses, family consultants, court child experts are still so often getting it wrong and recommending? What if those arrangements are not just inappropriate for your kids but potentially damaging to their development? Today we're going to talk about some research that might surprise you, research that challenges one of the most persistent and dangerous myths in post-separation parenting, and that is that equal time automatically is in children's best interests. Now I will warn you, some of the things that we talk about in this episode might make you angry. You might be listening to this and realize that you've been pressured into arrangements that really do not serve your children. You might recognize that professionals that you've spoken to have given you advice based on adult concepts of fairness, over and above your children's developmental needs. But here's what I want you to remember as we go through this Knowledge really is power. Understanding what children actually need gives you the tools to advocate effectively for arrangements that truly serve their well-being.

Speaker 1: 2:17

Let me tell you about Emma. Emma came to me when her five-year-old daughter started having some pretty severe anxiety and sleep disruption. Emma's daughter had been in a significant care arrangement with a view to increasing this to equal time for about eight months. Every time that it was time for Emma's daughter to go to her dad's house, she would have a meltdown. She'd started wetting the bed again. She'd become clingy and wouldn't let Emma out of her sight when she was in Emma's care. Several different professionals told Emma that this was just normal adjustment and that what was really needed is just more time. Unsurprisingly, one professional even suggested that Emma's own anxiety was contributing to her daughter's distress. But this was not Emma's daughter adjusting. She was being harmed by an arrangement that ignored her developmental needs.

Speaker 1: 3:09

Here's the thing the myth that significant care or equal shared care is automatically best for kids is so pervasive that questioning it makes you seem unreasonable. It's become the default assumption in family law in many countries around the world, even though research consistently shows that this assumption is just plain fucking wrong. This myth exists because we've confused adult fairness with children's needs. We've decided that if both parents get equal time, then somehow kids just benefit equally. But kids aren't adults. The math ain't mathing. Kids don't experience relationships the way that adults do, and they don't benefit from mathematical equality in care arrangements.

Speaker 1: 3:52

The 50-50 myth has been particularly reinforced by father's rights groups and broader cultural narratives around gender equality that, while probably well-intentioned, really miss the point. That, while probably well-intentioned, really miss the point. These groups often frame any deviation from equal time as being anti-father. But this completely misses the distinction between being anti-father and being pro-child, and here's what needs to be understood. You can absolutely support fathers having meaningful relationships with their kids, while also recognizing that those relationships need to be structured around children's developmental needs, not adult concepts of fairness, and this isn't just about traditional family structures, heterosexual family structures. I see the same battles for 50-50 arrangements. When same-sex parents separate two, pressure for mathematical equality exists, regardless of the gender dynamics, which proves that this whole thing isn't solely about father's rights, even though that's where primarily it started but it's become very much about adult entitlement versus children's needs. Any advocacy group that is genuinely pro-father should actually be pro-child, because children who have their developmental needs met are far more likely to maintain strong, healthy relationships with both parents throughout their lives.

Speaker 1: 5:13

Forcing inappropriate arrangements in the name of equality so often backfires and damages the very relationships that these groups claim they want to protect. Case in point my own son's story, ash, if you happen to listen to the previous episode. For the past seven years, ash has had zero contact with his father, as supported by the court, and now that he's an adult, is still choosing to have no time, and a significant part of that was the fact that his father forced him into an equal time arrangement for the better part of a decade. This is not the sort of stuff that any parent, any father, should be doing if they want to genuinely maintain a healthy relationship with a child. It can and does often backfire Back to the 50-50 myth.

Speaker 1: 5:59

This has persisted because it feels very fair to adults. It's easy for adults to understand why this could be quote-unquote fair, that both parents get the same amount of time, so it seems balanced and equitable on the surface. It also persists, this 50-50 myth, because it reduces child support obligations. When care is shared equally, financial obligations are most often reduced. It can also be really simple for lawyers, for other professionals working in the family law space, an equal division of time requires much less nuanced decision-making than arrangements that are based on individual children's needs. And it's also persisted because on the surface, on individual children's needs. And it's also persisted because on the surface it sounds really progressive. Equal shared care really sounds like it promotes gender equality and modern parenting. But here's the thing none of these reasons actually have anything to do with what's actually best for children.

Speaker 1: 7:00

Let me share some research that most professionals either don't know about or don't care to know about. Perhaps they just choose to ignore it. It's research commissioned by the Australian government, studies by McIntosh and colleagues. Using the longitudinal study of Australian children database, they found that for young children three years and under, having a high number of overnights independently predicted problems with emotional regulation, compared to much lower rates of overnight care or daytime contact only. And this was true regardless of the socioeconomic background, parenting quality or how well the parents got along. So even in families where there was no conflict and both parents were more or less very capable, frequent overnight separations from the primary caregiver were associated with emotional difficulties for young kids. There's international research from the University of Virginia that found that infants who spent at least one night away a week from their mothers had more insecure attachments compared to babies who had fewer overnights or saw the other parent only during the day.

Speaker 1: 8:04

Research from attachment experts shows us that infants and toddlers need predictable access to their primary attachment figure, that's the person who has been their main source of comfort, safety and daily care. Disrupting that relationship through frequent separations can interfere with the development of secure attachment. Studies on stress and development show that young children's stress response systems are still developing and frequent transitions between homes can create chronic low-level stress that affects brain development, emotion regulation and learning capacity. But here's what's really important. This research doesn't say that children shouldn't have any relationship with both parents. It tells us that the way that those relationships are maintained matters enormously, especially for young children. But before we dive into what children actually need at different developmental stages, we need to address something that makes me absolutely furious about the 50-50 push, and that's the staggering hypocrisy of how we treat the caregiving work of primary carers. And the primary carer is most often the mother Before separation.

Speaker 1: 9:14

Society has very clear expectations about motherhood. Mothers are expected to be primary caregivers. They're judged if they work too much, if they're not available enough, if they don't prioritize their children above all else. We have entire cultural conversations about mum guilt and the impossible standards placed on mothers. The message is clear Good mothers apparently put their children first. Good mothers are the primary emotional nurturers. Good mothers sacrifice their careers, their sleep, their personal time. The list goes on. This is what we're told, this is what is drummed into us that good mothers put their own needs, wants, desires, all the things aside, to meet their children's needs first.

Speaker 1: 9:56

But then something amazing happens with separation. The minute separation happens, suddenly, all that caregiving work becomes pretty much worthless. All those sleepless nights, all that emotional labor, all that deep knowledge of your children's needs. Overnight it's apparently irrelevant. The same system that demands that you be the primary caregiver now acts like you're completely interchangeable with a parent who might have done fuck all hands on caregiving throughout the kids' lives. This isn't just unfair, it is harmful to our kids.

Speaker 1: 10:32

When we ignore established caregiving patterns and primary attachment relationships in the name of equality, that's not promoting fairness. That's disrupting the very relationships that provide kids with security and stability. I see this constantly in my work. A mother who's been doing 80, 90, 95% or more of the hands-on caregiving since the birth of the children is suddenly told that she's being selfish or trying to keep the children from the other parent, or quote making unilateral decisions, or quote withholding the children, simply because she advocates for arrangements that reflect the established caregiving patterns prior to separation. Meanwhile, a non-primary caregiver often a father who barely knew his kid's routine, couldn't tell you their favourite foods or their fears, couldn't tell you what they really needed when they woke up in the middle of the night and needed comforting back to sleep suddenly wants equal time, and the system so many professionals in the system seem to support this as progressive and fair. Here's what's really happening. We're using feminist language about equality to mask what is actually an incredible devaluation of women's caregiving work. We're saying that years of primary caregiving count for nothing when it comes to post-separation arrangements, and this hurts our kids because it ignores their lived experience of who has been their primary source of comfort, safety and care.

Speaker 1: 12:02

This push for automatic, significant parenting time including 50-50, is not about gender equality. It's about adult entitlement. Real equality would mean recognising and valuing caregiving work that's already been done and making decisions based on children's established relationships and needs. Making decisions based on kids' established hierarchy of attachment instead of acting as though parents are suddenly now interchangeable just because they've separated. The developmental reality is that the brains and emotional systems of kids develop in fairly predictable stages. I'm not telling you anything that you don't already know when I say that a six-month-old baby has, when I say that a six-month-old baby has completely different needs from a six-year-old child and a six-year-old has completely different needs from a 16-year-old teen For babies and toddlers, so we're sort of talking birth to around three.

Speaker 1: 12:57

They're forming their primary attachment relationships. They need consistent, predictable access to their primary caregiver. They can't understand time or maintain mental images of absent parents for long periods. Frequent separations can interfere with their attachment security and emotion regulation and they benefit from shorter, more frequent contact with the non-primary parent, not overnight time For preschoolers so around three to five years. They're developing language and emotion regulation skills. They still need a primary, secure base. They benefit from routine and predictability and overnight visits should still be avoided until around the age of four and carefully monitored. They need time to process transitions and should not be rushed between homes. For school age kids 6 to 12 years they can understand time concepts and maintain relationships despite separations. They benefit from stability during the school week. They can handle slightly longer visits with the non-primary caregiver, but their school and social activities should be a significant part of the schedule, certainly not parental convenience and comfort. They still need a primary home base For teens. They're developing their independence and autonomy. They should have significant input into their own arrangements. Their education, friends and activities should take priority and they can maintain relationships through various means, not necessarily overnight time.

Speaker 1: 14:23

Forcing unwanted contact often backfires and damages relationships. The point is one size does not fit all. A 50-50 or significant care arrangement that might be harmful to a two-year-old might be completely appropriate for a 12-year-old, depending on their individual circumstances and needs. And it's important for me to say here that the information that I just shared is primarily around neurotypical kids and kids that don't have any other additional needs, and where there are no safety concerns, where we're not talking about issues with alcohol, substance use, mental health issues, those sorts of things.

Speaker 1: 15:01

There are specific situations where significant shared care or equal care is not just inappropriate but really damaging. When there's been family violence or abuse, kids who have witnessed or experienced abuse need stability and safety, not forced contact with an unsafe parent. Equal time arrangements or significant time arrangements are often used as a way for controlling and abusive partners to maintain control over their victims. When one parent has substance abuse issues, children should not be spending significant time with a parent who is not reliable in providing consistent or safe care due to alcohol or drug use. There are things that can be put in place to assess the safety. They're things that I unpack in much greater detail in the post-separation parenting blueprint. When there are significant mental health concerns that affect parenting capacity, this is another situation where we really need to be careful.

Speaker 1: 15:54

Untreated mental illness can make it very difficult for a parent to provide appropriate care and supervision. Significant time in the care of a non-primary caregiver can also be a real problem when parents live a fair distance apart. Frequent transitions over long distances are really exhausting for kids and interfere with their stability and routine. We also need to think carefully about post-separation parenting arrangements. When one parent has been quite minimally involved in hands-on caregiving before separation, suddenly jumping to a significant overnight care schedule, including equal time, does not serve children's needs for consistency and familiarity in those situations. Also, when kids have additional needs physical disabilities, learning difficulties, medical conditions that require specialised care and routine neurodivergence all of those things need to be taken into account. And when there's high levels of conflict between parents, irrespective of family violence, irrespective of post-separation abuse, irrespective of who's to blame, kids benefit from reduced exposure to parental conflict. They're not going to benefit from arrangements that require regular coordination and communication. If that coordination and communication involves patterns of control is disrespectful. You get the idea. In all of those situations, what kids need is protection, stability and arrangements that prioritize their safety and development over and above adult concepts of fairness or adult needs and emotions. So what's the cost of getting it wrong?

Speaker 1: 17:28

Well, when kids are placed in inappropriate arrangements, the consequences can be significant and long-lasting. There can be attachment disruption. Young children may struggle to form secure relationships if their primary attachment is consistently and constantly interrupted. And here's the thing disruption to attachment in early childhood can have significant long-lasting impacts on a child that lasts throughout their adulthood. This is something that I'm going to be unpacking in further podcast episodes. There can be chronic stress put on kids frequent transitions, unpredictable care, spending a lot of time in the care of a caregiver who isn't tuned in, who was not actively genuinely tuned in and involved prior to separation. They can create ongoing stress that affects brain development and learning capacity. There can be emotion regulation difficulties.

Speaker 1: 18:17

Kids may struggle to manage their emotions and behavior when they don't have consistent support and routine and the levels of contact that they need with their primary attachment With young kids. They're often communicating with us with their behavior as opposed to with their words, and things like big meltdowns, clinging behavior, regression in behavior, you know, no longer doing certain tasks or activities or skills that they've previously mastered. These are the ways that young kids are communicating with us that they're distressed, that their nervous system is distressed as well as they're being emotionally distressed, and that the care arrangements are not in their best interest and are not working. There can be academic and social problems. Inappropriate parenting arrangements can interfere with how kids are able to attend and pay attention at school, maintaining friendships aligned with the physical behavior communicating that things aren't okay. There also might be sleep and eating disruption.

Speaker 1: 19:15

Different rules and routines and expectations in each home can affect children's basic self-care and health as well, and this is another reason why, when there's ongoing conflict, when there's not genuine collaboration and cooperation between parents, children should not be spending significant time in the care of the non-primary parent. Their routine is disrupted, their sense of stability is disrupted, and this isn't minor or something that they'll adjust to. This is actually something that can cause long-term harm to kids. The tragedy is that many of these problems are dismissed as just being normal adjustment, when they're actually signs that the arrangements are not working for the kids. So what do kids actually need? Well, what they don't need is mathematical equality. What they don't need is parents who think that the arrangements are fair. What they need is a primary secure base, a main primary home where they feel safe, supported and emotionally regulated, where there is consistency and predictability with the parenting style. So we're not just talking about a primary secure base, as in the physical location. We're also talking about the parenting style, the expectations. That's what helps kids to feel secure. They need a predictable routine.

Speaker 1: 20:27

Consistent expectations, rules and care patterns help kids feel secure. They need age appropriate and developmentally appropriate contact with both parents. If it's safe to have contact with the non-primary caregiver, they need arrangements that match their developmental capacity and their individual needs. They need protection from conflict. They need arrangements that minimize their exposure to ongoing parental disagreements and tension, and this is not to be used as a way to say oh well, see, you know we really should be avoiding conflict because conflict's bad. No, some conflict is necessary and needed, like when you're actually standing up and advocating for your kids instead of giving in to demands from a non-primary parent who's wanting a level of care time that is not in the kid's best interests. That sort of conflict's appropriate, but kids still need to be shielded from it as much as humanly possible. They need stability in their daily lives. They need consistency with their caregiving. So, whether that's daycare, school, friendships, activities, extended family community connections, they need quality over quantity. They need meaningful, engaged time with a tuned in parent rather than just balancing up was on the schedule, and these should be the things that are driving the decisions, not adult desires for equal time, adult concepts of fairness or legal perceptions of what's quote-unquote possible to achieve as far as the law goes.

Speaker 1: 21:57

So what can you do If you're being pressured into agreeing to an arrangement of significant time or 50-50 equal time with your co-parent and it doesn't feel right for your kids? This is what I want you to do Trust your instincts. If you don't think that these arrangements are right, or if your kids have been spending time with the other parent and they're showing signs of distress, regression or difficulty coping, please take that seriously. Your intuition's important and what you're picking up in your kid's behavior is important. Understand the research. Arm yourself with knowledge about what children actually need at their developmental stage.

Speaker 1: 22:36

It's hard to advocate effectively without understanding the evidence. Question assumptions when professionals tell you that significant time or 50-50 time is quote-unquote best. Ask them to explain why that's actually best for your children, specifically linked with their individual ages, needs and circumstances. Focus on your kids' individual needs rather than accepting generic, cookie-cutter advice. What works for another family or for another child may not be right for yours. And seek support from professionals who actually have some iota of understanding about child development, not just legal precedents. Look for people who can explain how different arrangements will affect your children's development and well-being.

Speaker 1: 23:19

We're only going to see real social and cultural change where parenting arrangements are concerned when parents and professionals alike are properly educated on child development science, widely accepted attachment theory and post-separation parenting research. The knowledge exists. It's just not reaching the people who need it most, and this is one of the reasons why I'm so passionate about education and advocacy. Legal changes are important, but they're only effective when they're accompanied by cultural understanding of why those changes actually matter. That's something that's lacking in Australia right now. The Family Law Act changed to remove the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility and it's linked to equal shared parenting time in 2024. However, that has not been accompanied by an understanding a cultural, societal understanding of why those changes were necessary and why they matter. We're still seeing so many primary carers dragged through the court system because there are non-primary caregivers who are very convinced that they have a right and entitlement to equal or significant time. This is a problem, but it's only going to change if we shed light on it, if we talk about it and if we educate ourselves and help to educate others.

Speaker 1: 24:38

In the coming weeks, we're going to be talking about some other dangerous patterns that I see and some other information that I think will be helpful for you on your protective parenting journey. And throughout all of this, we'll be exploring in greater detail how avoiding conflict really does put our kids at greater risk, and the things that we need to know and the things that we need to do to really be embodying protective advocacy for our kids. So back to what we've covered today. Kids are not adults. They don't benefit from arrangements based on adult concepts of fairness. They need arrangements that are actually aligned with their developmental needs, and your job as a parent is not to keep other adults happy. Your job is to advocate for arrangements that support your individual children's healthy development, even when that might mean challenging popular assumptions and standing firm despite professional or social pressure.

Speaker 1: 25:35

If today's episode has opened your eyes to problems with the current cultural assumptions about shared care, you need comprehensive guidance on what kids actually need at each developmental stage. That's why I've created the blueprint to give you detailed, evidence-based information about age-appropriate care arrangements, examples of how that can look in a parenting plan or parenting orders, how you can evaluate where the current arrangements are working, what to do when they're not, as well as so much more All the things that can potentially come up, even when you're separating and you've got one or more adult kids and you're wanting to protect them, because, yeah, adult kids get impacted by the separation of their parents too. That's something else that I can actually speak about personally, because my own parents separated and divorced when I was an adult, so that's something else that I understand on a much deeper level. I've really enjoyed being with you here today. Thank you so much for listening. I'll talk to you soon.