Divorce Conference - Valencia Saturday 16th of October 2010

1. Co-parenting over timeThe impact of legislative changes on the incidence and predictors of joint custody Divorce Conference - Valencia Saturday 16th of October 2010 An Katrien Sodermans Koen Matthijs Research Group Family & Population. CeS0. K.U.Leuven

2. Evolutions in the area of child custody • Changed evaluation of parental role • From mother as primary caregiver towards equality of parents • “The parental couple survives the conjugal couple” (Villeneuve-Gokalp, 2009) • Changes in Belgian custody legislation (as in many Western countries) • 1995: Joint legal custody • 2006: Joint physical custody (as preferred residential model) • Joint custody: assumed beneficial effects on child well-being (Meta-analysis of Bausermann, 2002): • Maintaining parent-child relationship • More parental involvement • Better financial resources • Consequence: Increased number of children in bi-location, commuting between the household of mother and father after divorce = shared residence

3. Consequences of joint physical custody • Be careful with a selection bias! Selection of higher social class-families into shared residence • Predictors of shared residence: • Higher income, higher educated parents • Lower parental conflict • Less children, more often boys • Studies about the effects of shared residence for the well-being of children are mostly based on the situation where the residence type was a “free choice” • In Belgium: “shared residence” became the standard. RESEARCH QUESTION: Did predictors of shared residence change due to legislative changes in 1995 and 2006?

4. Data and sample • “Divorce in Flanders” dataset (19/07/10) • 1819 divorced individuals with at least one child at the time of the divorce • Independent observations • Random selection of one partner from each dissolved marriage • 801 fathers (44%) and 1018 mothers (56%) • Separated (started living separately) between 1973 and 2009 • Selected child: • Between 0 and 40 years old at time of separation (mean age: 9,4) • 954 boys (52%) and 865 girls (48%)

5. Dependent variable: Residence type • Residence type at time of separation (unless temporary arrangement of one year or less)

6. Independent variables Divorce cohort: based on year of starting living separately Educational level

7. Independent variables Parental conflict How much conflict was there between you both after the decision to definitely break up? Give a number from 0 (no conflict) to 10 (a lot of conflict).

8. Results: Incidence of joint physical custody Distribution (column %) of residence type per divorce cohort  Flexible residence omitted from further analyses Chi² = 68,19; p<0,0001

9. Results: Factors associated with shared residence 1. Education of father Distribution (column %) of father’s educational level per residence type and divorce cohort

10. Results: Factors associated with shared residence 2. Education of mother Distribution (column %) of mother’s educational level per residence type and divorce cohort

11. Results: Factors associated with shared residence 3. Sex of the child Distribution (column %) of sex per residence type and divorce cohort

12. Results: Factors associated with shared residence 4. Age of the child (at time of separation) Median age of children per residence type and divorce cohort

13. Results: Factors associated with shared residence 5. Family size Distribution (%) of number of children per residence type and divorce cohort

14. Results: Factors associated with shared residence 6. Conflict between ex-partners Distribution (%) of conflict level per residence type and divorce cohort

15. Results: Change in predictors of shared residence *** p<0.001; ** p < 0.01; * p < 0.05; ° p < 0.10

16. Summary of results Education of father • Before 1995: higher incidence of joint custody with high and middle educated fathers • After legislative changes in 1995 and 2006: effect of education decreased • Legislative changes have led to cumulative diffusion process of joint physical custody from high to low SES Age of the child at separation • Effect of age increased over time • Before 1995 no effect, after 1995, joint custody more often with younger children • Evidence that custody decisions are now more in the interest of the child? (Maintaining good parent-child relationship especially important with younger children) • Or measurement issue? Sex of the child • Before 2006 higher incidence of joint custody with boys (bivariate results) • After 2006: no association with sex of child • Joint custody used to be popular for higher educated fathers with sons!

17. Summary of results Family size • Before 1995: lower incidence of joint custody in large families • Since 1995: effect of family size decreased • Confirmation for normalisation process: joint custody became the new standard, whatever the composition of the family Parental conflict • Before 1995: joint custody especially in low-conflict divorces • Since 1995  decreased association between conflict and joint custody • Since 2006: the opposite trend becomes visible: more joint custody in middle and high conflicted families (bivariate results). • Link with diffusion of joint custody to lower ses-families? • Joint custody as “victory” in court? “Having the children” as a goal? • Joint custody to avoid alimony payment?

18. Discussion • What will be the consequences of the diffusion process regarding joint custody from high to low ses (and from low to high conflict couples), given the fact that joint custody • is an expensive arrangement (housing, transport, double equipment) • requires higher parental communication/cooperation skills • Are the positive effects of joint custody for children, reported in many research, conditional upon the socio-demographic profile of the parents (higher SES, lower conflict)? • Is it desireable that joint custody is ‘promoted’ by the law as standard model?