When the Co-Parenting Issue is Safety
Safety is close to the bottom of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. It is core to children’s ability to become resilient. It can also be a very difficult topic to address during a divorce. Here’s how the issue can arise during a discussion of parenting time arrangements:
Parent A: You want equal parenting time, but I’m worried sick about you being able to take care of the kids, especially at night and also after your softball games when you’d be driving them home after partying with your team.
Parent B: What are you talking about?
Parent A: Don’t pretend you don’t know what I mean. It’s how much you drink. You drink every night. I find you passed out in the chair in front of the TV half the time.
Parent B: I knew you’d pull this. Have I had a DWI? Lost my job? No! It’s you who has the problem, not me. Quit comparing me to your alcoholic dad. I think you just want the kids more to get more child support.
Parent A: This has nothing to do with child support, and you know it. Besides, you did get a DWI.
Parent B: If you’re gonna go back 15 years, then let’s talk about the time you passed out at your best friend’s wedding reception.
Parent A: Yeah, one time. And I basically quit drinking after that.
Parent B: Right, and now you have a panic attack any time I want a beer. Quit trying to control me.
Sound a bit familiar? Sound a bit challenging? Sound like the children in this family could easily find themselves in the middle of escalating parental conflict, if they aren’t already?
Substance abuse or misuse is best understood as a systemic issue in a family because it impacts everyone. And each family member has his or her story about it. Denial, minimalization and sometimes projection are very likely to be part of one parent’s story, especially if they are dealing with the disease of chemical dependency. Anxiety, frustration and co-dependence are very likely to be woven into the other side of the story. Each parent is likely to show anger, because anger is hardwired and is a protective response to vulnerability.
In addition, each parent is likely experiencing fear. The parent identified as having a problem may be fearful of consequences like losing access to their kids, or even their parental rights. The parent raising the issue is fearful of something bad happening to the kids that might have been prevented by speaking out and setting firm boundaries.
And what are the children’s stories? Might a skilled child-inclusive process be helpful?
As a neutral child and family specialist, I believe that a family law response to situations like this must have a laser- focus on what the children in the family need and deserve: the best safe relationship they can have with both parents. As a neutral, it is imperative to stay in a place of empathy and also be willing to calmly ask hard questions and to name the issues that arise, not with judgment but with clarity.
If a neutral professional has earned the trust of both parents, it is possible to engage with them in a voluntary process of creating a Confidential Safety Plan that is:
-
- designed to preserve parent-child attachment as much as possible; and
- identifies mutually agreed-upon “trust but verify” safety strategies, and
- specifies clear consequences and steps to be taken if a parent will not or is not able to honor their commitment to safety during parenting time as identified in the Safety Plan.
Because divorce decrees and Parenting Plans are online public documents, and given the sensitivity of issues addressed in a Safety Plan, it is important that the Safety Plan be filed with other confidential divorce documents where it can be accessed as needed, but will not be available to the public.
As with all out-of-court dispute resolution, the *Confidential Voluntary Safety Plan is not an appropriate option for all families, particularly if coercive control, domestic violence or child abuse are part of a family’s dynamic. But for those parents generally able to engage in good faith negotiation, this option can be a safe way for them to address a difficult issue with dignity, clarity and respect.
About the Author
Deborah Clemmensen has devoted her professional life to the well-being of children and families.
She is a licensed psychologist with decades of experience as a psychologist working with children, adolescents, families and adults. She been a Neutral Child and Family Specialist in family law for twenty-three years, participating in Collaborative Practice teams, traditional divorce processes and child-inclusive mediation, helping parents create Parenting Plans, We Statements and Confidential Collaborative Safety Plans.
Deborah has extensive experience as a consultant and trainer on child mental health issues and Collaborative Practice and has done research and published articles on a variety of topics.
Deborah has twice been co-President of the Collaborative Law Institute of Minnesota. She has served two terms on the CLI Board. She continues to participate on several committees of the Collaborative Law Institute of Minnesota, including the Training Committee and is currently a member of the Hague Convention Task Force of the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals.
As a Collaborative professional, Deborah coined the phrase, “keeping children at the center and out of the middle.” This principle guides her work with families in Collaborative Practice and family law.
Contact:
Deborah Clemmensen, M.Eq., Licensed Psychologist, Neutral Child and Family Specialist
deborah.clemmensen@gmail.com
www.deborahclemmensen.com
*Deb Clemmensen will be presenting “Confidential Voluntary Safety Plans” on November 9, 2023 from 9 AM – 11AM at the Neighborhood House at Wellstone Center | 179 Robie Street East, St. Paul, MN 55107 Hosted by the Collaborative Law Institute of Minnesota. Details and Registration https://collaborativelaw.org/events/
I hope that young children were not still up and watching the *Academy Awards broadcast when Will Smith got out of his seat, walked up the concourse, and forcefully slapped Chris Rock for making a poor joke at the expense of his wife Jada Pinkett Smith. But even if children didn’t watch it live, they are likely still being exposed to the ongoing coverage and analysis of this startling event on social media and mainstream media. Disagreement abounds over which man was most in the wrong. Some posters and oped writers try to justify each man’s actions. There have been thoughtful critiques about toxic masculinity in our culture, and how it inevitably leads to violence of one kind or another.
Many believe Chris Rock was bullying Jada Pinkett Smith by publicly mocking her bald head, especially given her alopecia. Some respond that comedians insulting celebrities at “star-studded events” and roasts has become something of the norm and is to be expected. Some say Will Smith’s retaliation was also bullying behavior, since Smith was trained to box like a professional for the film Ali and is much bigger and stronger than Rock. But others respond that his response was justified to “protect” his wife. (I confess, I thought Pinkett Smith’s grimace of disgust and exaggerated eye roll at the weak joke was a pretty potent response in and of itself).
What does this whole event model for our children, who emulate adult behavior? Is mocking others, especially for things they can’t control, ever justified? Does saying “Just kidding!” after a cruel remark make it okay? Should bystanders go along by joining the mocking laughter, or do they have a responsibility to call out bullying behavior?
Is lashing out aggressively after a perceived put-down ever justified? Does being “in the heat of the moment and not thinking clearly” make an impulsive violent response, okay? Should bystanders go along by saying nothing, or do they have a responsibility to call out violent behavior?
What does this event say about how women and girls should expect to be treated? In the Me Too era, a time when native women have disappeared in shocking numbers, when human trafficking and domestic violence are still huge social problems, we know that women do need the strong protection of laws and social norms. Is this kind of protection the same or different than what happened at the Oscars?
If you haven’t already, I encourage you to watch the documentary “When We Were Bullies.” This film was also featured briefly at the Academy Awards as a nominee for best short documentary. Ellen Bruno, the creator of the masterful film Split about the children of divorce was a creative consultant for this film, which is extremely well done. It focuses on a 5th grade bullying incident and the lingering effects, 50 years later, on those who participated. Like this essay, it raises important questions and examines context and perspective, but does not aim for simplistic resolutions.
As parents and adults who care about children, we need to have open conversations with them, and ask curious questions about bullying behavior vs. respectful behavior and the difference between control and power. We need to ask ourselves what it really means to create safety for others, and what responsibility we all share when safety is violated. And we need to always be aware that the most powerful tool in the adult toolkit is modeling the behavior we want our children to emulate and taking responsibility rather than blaming others for any time we (as humans) fall off the high road.
*Since this article was written, Will Smith has apologized publicly for his inexcusable behavior at the Academy Awards ceremony. He has been banned from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and the Awards ceremony for 10 years.
Author: Deborah Clemmensen, M.Eq., L.P. is a Neutral Child and Family Specialist in
Collaborative Practice and Family Law
deborah.clemmensen@gmail.com
In collaborative dissolution cases, this is a common objection when meeting for the first time with clients. Another variation is, “I can be a terrific co-parent, just not with my spouse.” I am often stymied by this reaction. Of course, I know nothing about the other spouse except the views of my potential client.
My initial response is to acquiesce and to reject the collaborative approach. But depending on the circumstances, both spouses bear the risk of escalating litigation.
A better approach is to persuade the spouse in my office of the advantages of the collaborative model, especially if the couple has trouble communicating. They may have misperceived the resistance of the other spouse. I consider the context. The couple has typically been working toward a break-up for a long time. They have often taken strong positions based upon strained communications. I encourage the spouse to review the open communications features described in the Participation Agreement.
For example, in four-way meetings with clients and attorneys, both spouses can be safely heard without the risk that their words could later be regretted. In addition, the spouses themselves can set the pace of the process rather than be bound by judicial deadlines. This may be persuasive in cases where one spouse is more eager to end the marriage. Resolution is often facilitated when some issues are allowed to “percolate.”
Another advantage of the collaborative process is cost savings. Initially, this seemed to me to be counter-intuitive given the potential number of team members and meetings. But when the alternative is communicating exclusively through the attorneys, these meetings are a bargain.
If a client in my office expresses a favorable view toward the collaborative process, another approach is to communicate directly in writing with the “stubborn” spouse. The correspondence always contains the caveat that I represent only their spouse and I recommend they obtain their own attorney. I include a general discussion recommending the collaborative model and provide IACP literature and brochures.
The letter accurately states that the vast majority of all divorces are resolved through settlement. A major advantage with the collaborative process is the emphasis on preserving future relationships (especially where minor children are involved).
In discussing the problem of the stubborn spouse, one of my colleagues gave me permission to share the following experience.
He consulted with a woman who was knowledgeable and favorably inclined towards a collaborative divorce. But she was adamant that her husband was too stubborn and controlling to ever agree to anything she suggested. Nevertheless, she agreed that he could send her husband a letter recommending the collaborative process. The letter was down-to-earth and explained the practical benefits of enhanced communications and interest-based negotiations.
To his client’s surprise, her husband agreed to give it a try and requested a referral to another collaborative lawyer. As it turned out, the collaborative process proved successful.
The take-away for both collaborative professionals and clients is to continue exploring this option even when confronted with resistance from a stubborn spouse. The process of reaching agreement is facilitated when couples can meet on their own terms. Also, clients are often attracted to the collegial format. If a resistant spouse is on the fence, share with them Father Frances Fleming’s sage advice, “Love your enemies. It drives them nuts.”
About the Author
Gregory R. Solum, Attorney at Law
My goal is to guide my clients to their destination in a manner that is transparent, fluid and valuable. General Practice of Civil, Family, Probate and Appellate Law since 1980/ Mediator (including Family Court) since 1995/ Collaborative Team Divorce since 2000/ University of Minnesota Law School Instructor 1991-2009. www.solumlaw.com
Children begin their lives constantly observing and emulating our use of language. A baby watches, listens and models her mother’s face saying “Ohhhh,” moving her own lips to form the shape of that sound. A toddler in his car seat repeats the word his parent blurted out when cut off suddenly in traffic, usually to the great chagrin of the parent. My 5-year-old granddaughter cocks her head seriously and says, “Well, actually, the most interesting thing is…..” just the way her mom does.
Knowing they are listening, seeking to understand, and emulating how we talk, adults must be mindful of what we say and how we say it in the presence of children. This may be especially important during the life crisis of a divorce, when children are already feeling vulnerable and anxious. Similar to being cut off suddenly in traffic, negative emotions during a divorce can quickly heighten, along with the risk of blurting out words one will later regret. When under stress, the guard rails filtering words can become wobbly or fall off altogether.
It’s not just angry, sarcastic, insulting words that children internalize, it is also the meaning of those words in the context of relationships. Children are deeply hurt and frightened when parents fight with each other, and not infrequently, will beg them to stop. What does it mean to them that the two most important adults in their lives are attacking each other this way?
We live in an era when disrespect, insulting and belittling words and verbal abuse are regularly tweeted out in all caps. Sadly, this has the effect of normalizing unfiltered language. This is hard enough to manage as an adult but giving vent to verbal rage will never be anything but damaging to a child. So, what can parents do if they feel triggered? They need to slow it down.
Two simple techniques to help create more mental and emotional space under stress are:
- Mindful breathing: taking at least four deep, slow belly breaths before responding; and
- Softening your eyes: focusing on relaxing the muscles around your eyes so they fall back into their sockets.
Both techniques will relax tension in your body, which helps to clear your head, strengthen your guardrails, and give you time to respond rather than react. If this can create more emotional safety for your children, it is well worth the effort.
Author: Deborah Clemmensen, M.Eq., L.P. is a Neutral Child and Family Specialist in Collaborative Practice and Family Law
- Have a clarifying discussion with your co-parent about what to expect in terms of help with holiday rituals like decorating the house, shared gift-giving for the kids and possible shared activities like Christmas morning or one of the nights of Hanukkah.
- Decide with your kids (or for them, depending on their ages) on a few heart-felt and meaningful ways to celebrate. Having a do-able game plan can relieve stress. Now is a good time to create new rituals as well as honor the old.
- Be authentic and set realistic expectations for activities and gifts if your energy and finances are low. Resist any urge to blame your co-parent. Putting your kids in the middle is guaranteed to make them unhappy.
- Actively enlist your support system this year. Most people who care about you will want to help, so give them a way. Cookies made by a friend or family member will be just as delicious, and someone would love to help you set up your tree. Meet with your therapist, go to the gym, get that massage.
- Affirm your support for your kids to enjoy holiday activities with both sides of their extended family. When you are not with them, focus not on resentment, but on resting, renewing and recharging in the true spirit of the season.