Study finds shared parenting detrimental to children

I came across this story in Adelaide Now, via the Australian Divorce Blog.

In 2006 the Australian Government introduced a shared parenting model, in response to lobbying by fathers' rights groups, to replace the idea of ‘custody’ or 'ownership' of children. Now, a University of South Australia research paper, which was based on interviews of children from divorced families, has found that: "the one-size-fits-all practice now favoured by the courts was focused on what parents wanted rather than children's wellbeing", and that it has resulted in bad outcomes for many children.

I'm not going to make much comment upon this, as I'm obviously not an expert upon the Australian shared parenting model, and I haven't read the research paper. However, I have previously indicated here that I am in favour of a presumption (or starting-point) of shared residence, which appears to be similar to the Australian model, and this research does remind us that any such model must remain centred upon what is best for the child, rather than what is best for the parents.


  1. This item seems vaguely interesting until you look more closely.

    It turns out that the research by Dr Alan Campbell of the University of South Australia isn't about shared parenting at all. His study is based on questions he put to 16 children of whom at most 2 had parents in a shared parenting situation. Nothing the children were asked is relevant to shared parenting. The data were gathered before the new legislation was introduced, so it also has nothing to do with the new laws.

    This is just standard anti-father stuff promoted by Adelaide Now; only the headline suggests that shared parenting is detrimental, there is nothing in the body of the article to indicate that.

  2. Nick Langford efficiently disposes of another enemy of fathers' rights!



Post a comment

Thank you for taking the time to comment on this post. Constructive comments are always welcome, even if they do not coincide with my views! Please note, however, that comments will be removed or not published if I consider that:
* They are not relevant to the subject of this post; or
* They are (or are possibly) defamatory; or
* They breach court reporting rules; or
* They contain derogatory, abusive or threatening language; or
* They contain 'spam' advertisements (including links to any commercial websites).
Please also note that I am unable to give advice.