High Conflict Coparenting

High Conflict Coparents become locked in conflict that significantly impairs the child and his or her development. The adversarial system contributes to conflict. One or both parents may have a personality disorder.

Once two parents become actively engaged in conflict with each other, it is certain that the child is living in an environment of hostility, revenge-seeking, and emotional reactivity.

The adversarial legal system is where high conflict coparenting begins for many parents. There is a winner and a loser, and it’s a Winner-Takes-All system, all too often. Sole custody has been shown to create conflict and to exacerbate conflict. Limiting a parents involvement in a child’s life increases hostility between the parents. And research has demonstrated that conflict between parents increases in sole custody arrangements.

Research has also demonstrated that the conflict decreases over time with a shared custody arrangement. This makes sense. If loss of a child is not at issue, fear and anxiety and anger and conflict will go down.

The personality of the parent plays a significant role in many High Conflict Coparenting relationships. Parents who have significant deficits in the development of healthy narcissism during his or her own childhood will not cope well with the challenges of the adversarial court system. These are people more likely to experience failed relationships so, of course, they are more likely to end up in a family break-up.

Parents who were raised with unhealthy narcissism are not able to feel good about him or herself unless there is an overall negative approach to relationships, both with one’s self and with others. Healthy narcissism is at the heart of normal self-esteem, positive feelings, appropriate self-regulation, and the positive investment in good relationships.

The combination of an adversarial approach to resolving family tensions and parental deficits in the area of healthy narcissism prove to be deadly for the children. The children in these High Conflict Coparenting relationships become collateral damage as the parents engage in mutual self-destruction using each other and their little ones as weapons.

There is an assumption, based on decades of research, that shared parenting is in the best interest of the child. Most family law cases will eventually reach that goal. Some will not, and some should not. If a parent is unable or unwilling to even try to understand that a child cannot grow up healthy when a parent literally hates half of who that child is, and is intent on destroying that half of the child, the parent needs to be removed from the child’s life.

Fortunately, most parents love for their child is larger, deeper, greater, than their hatred for the other parent. Over time, most parents learn how to put the child’s need for wholeness and healthy self-esteem above the need of the parent to be right, to be the best, to be the winner – no matter the cost.

Parents are often shocked to discover that they can be removed from their child’s life as a result of accusations made in open court without any presentation of evidence – at least not Law & Order or CSI evidence.

Most parents come to family court expecting American-style justice:

1 Innocent until proven guilty

2 Systemic commitment to justice for litigants

3 Ability to face the accuser

4 Beyond a shadow of the doubt

Coparenting decisions in family court are made based on some basic considerations:

1 Best interest of the child - laws are crafted to protect the child, not the parent

2 Shared parenting - preference will be given to the parent who demonstrates the ability to share the child

It can be impossible to find a peaceful resolution to a family conflict when litigation in open court occurs. The family will never know what post-break-up life could be like if the war had not occurred. Some parents will get there as they move through the process. Some will not.

If parents are still as emotional and reactive at 1 year, post-break-up as they were at the beginning, it’s safe to assume that 1 or both of them are actively engaged in High Conflict Coparenting. It does not mean they are both doing it. It does not mean it is mutual. It may be, but it is very difficult to coparent with a High Conflict Personality.

We need to make a distinction between High Conflict Coparenting - both parents are initiating the conflict and coparenting with a High Conflict Personality - one parent is initiating the conflict and the other parent is reacting and managing the conflict poorly.

There are hallmarks of the High Conflict relationship:
1 Using the child as a weapon, a messenger, a companion, a best friend

2 Hostility, mistrust, blaming, anger, dishonesty

3 Rules and expectations that are competitive, confusing and create chaos between the two homes

4 Scheduling and exchanges are chaotic and unpredictable

5 Power struggles occur in almost every point of contact between the two homes: clothes, haircuts, tooth brushing, diet, backpacks, toys, trimming of the finger and toe nails, cleanliness of the ears and hair, strip-down searches for any mark of any kind on the body of the child, and on and on and on and on

6 Parents focus on manipulating the child rather than nurturing the child

7 The child is torn, insecure, caught in the middle, anxious/withdrawn, sad/angry, acting out, focused on the parents

If you or someone you care about is in the midst of a High Conflict Coparenting relationship, do something, say something, take action. There are resources for these families in every community. It is possible to intervene and help all of the family members.

The child only has so much resilience. There is a limit. Once that limit has been reached, the results for the child are devastating for a lifetime.

Parallel Coparenting

Parallel coparenting is a model where the two homes -- just like parallel lines -- do not intersect. The only intersection is the child moving back and forth between the two homes.

This model is beneficial to a child when the unresolved differences between the two parents create chronic tension for the child or when the conflict flares in front of the child.

The goal of this model is to reduce the chronic psychological and emotional tension for the child (also known as child abuse) and to eliminate exposure to parental conflict (also known as Inter-Personal Violence (IPV)).

Some people object to the use of the words child abuse and violence because they believe that only the use of physical force to inflict pain should be called abusive or violent.

Child abuse includes any form of deliberate and/or ongoing infliction of psychological or emotional pain. For over two decades, researchers have documented the radical impairments that occur in the brain development of children who live with chronic hostile psychological and emotional abuse.

Parents must get the child out of the middle when contact between the two parents is hostile, whether that hatred and hostility is silent and cold, or loud and hot.

Parallel coparenting is the model that will protect the child caught in the middle. This model allows the child to experience calm, a sense of relief, and the ability to use his or her energy for being a child: exploring, experiencing, learning, growing, and just being a kid.

Unresolved differences occur for many reasons but here are some examples.
1 Unplanned pregnancy
Parents had a brief or superficial relationship when the child was conceived. Not only do the parents have nothing in common, they actually hold radically different world views and beliefs about people.

2 Deceit
Sometimes parents have led a double life with their intimate partner during a relationship. Depending on many factors, that deceit may have inflicted such a deep wound that healing is very difficult.

3 Domestic Violence (DV) / Substance Abuse (SA) / Mental Illness (MI)
When there is a specific pattern and problem which has led to the break-up of the family, the restructuring process can take anywhere form 18 months to 3 years. DV, SA, and MI are three such situations. Children cannot be exposed to the high emotion of parents with this kind of history. It’s just too much pressure for the child.

There are many other situations where parallel coparenting is the best choice, sometimes for a period of time that allows cooling down, healing and moving on. For some families, this model will be long term.

Parents who practice this model rarely have communication between the homes. Both parents take equal responsibility to be on time and at the right place for pick-ups and drop-offs. Parents only make direct contact in an emergency situation so there is no uncertainty about the nature of or reason for the contact.

Specific and non-negotiable parenting plans work best for these families.

Contact between the two homes is via email or Our Family Wizard (OFW) or Talking Parents. Communications are direct, brief and respectful. All communication is child-focused.
Parallel Coparents have separate and clear rules in each house. Children cope extremely well when they know what to expect.

Both parents take equal responsibility for clarity in their own home and neither parent disparages the rules in the other parent’s home.

Decision making is made in each home and conferring is rare. If there are shared expenses, parents establish a specific method to deal with that and do not deviate. Some parallel coparents attend all of the child’s appointments together, and some take turns.

Parallel coparents have clearly defined boundaries for transitions between the homes and for any joint activity that may occur with the child.

Facilitated coparenting meetings are the only way that Parallel Coparents engage. There is a clear agenda for the meeting and the facilitator manages the communication.

Parents who choose parallel coparenting are unable to achieve basic respect and cooperation, usually due to significant, unresolved relationship issues. They choose to parent the child separately in each home with very little contact with the other parent because they understand that the child needs peace and calm and permission to love both parents.

Why Isn't This Considered Child Abuse?

A 5 year old returns to his mother's house and asks his step-father, "does my mommy really love my daddy more than she loves you?" An 8 year old returns from a week-end spent with her father, and tells her mother "it's your fault that daddy doesn't have any money anymore." A 14 year old, angry when her father won't buy her a new cell phone, tells her father "you're a loser anyway who can't even pay child support and spends all your money on your girlfriend." The parent who hears these words from a child rarely reacts in a helpful way to the child because it is so clear the child is echoing something heard in the home of the other parent. And the immediate response is almost always in reaction to the other parent, as the parent demands "why would your mommy tell you that?" Or exclaims "your daddy has plenty of money?" Or sarcastically says "gee, I wonder where you heard that?!"

The parents who talk to their children or even in front of their children about the child's other parent are engaging in parental alienation behaviors. For most parents, these moments are rare and typically occur only in the first few months of the transition from living together in one home to living apart in two homes. These hurtful disclosures are also rarely intentional and most parents regret the words almost as soon as they are spoken when they realize the hurt they have inflicted on their child.

Unfortunately about 10-15% of parents struggling with family break up either don't notice that they are hurting their child, or they don't care because they place a much higher priority on making sure that the child knows which one of their parents is good and which one is bad, which one is right and which one is wrong. These parents have deficits, either temporary or permanent, that prevent them from being able to protect their children from abuse and maltreatment.

So why isn't it child abuse when a parent repeatedly engages in behavior that is clearly harmful to the child? The answer is complicated. Children are rarely protected from the psychological abuse of a parent, whether the family situation emerges in a Juvenile Court context (Welfare & Institutions Code) and or in a Family Court context (Family Code.) The exception in both Juvenile Court and Family Court is domestic violence. Children exposed to domestic violence in the home are considered to have been victims of child abuse and the law requires that those children be protected from further abuse. Exposure includes visual and/or auditory and does not include any physical abuse of the child.

Domestic violence exposure was not always considered to be child abuse. It came to be categorized as child abuse as a direct result of research documenting the devastating effects on children exposed to parental violence. The harm to these child victims of exposure to domestic violence occurred regardless of whether the domestic violence between the adults included physical harm to one of the adults. Perhaps the research on parental alienation behaviors will eventually result in similar changes to the law in order to protect children exposed to parental psychological abuse from a life time of problems startlingly similar to those documented in children exposed to parental domestic violence: low self-esteem leading to depression and alcohol/drug addiction; relationship difficulties involving psychological control and manipulation; and excessive dependency on others for approval and attention that prevents self-sufficiency and adequate adult adjustment.

Parents who use parental alienation strategies with the intent of harming the child's relationship with their other parent, can be considered to be psychologically maltreating their children. The expression of these strategies inevitably and directly results in children feeling worthless, flawed, unloved, unwanted, endangered, or only of value in meeting another's needs, a commonly accepted definition of psychological maltreatment proposed by Binggeli, Hart, & Brassard.

Parents who use alienating strategies also behave in other ways that add the child's feeling of being abused and mistreated. They intrude on the child's life in every area in order to prevent the child from feeling comfortable or safe anywhere except in the presence of the abusive parent. Parents who abuse their children lack empathy and are unable to accept or acknowledge any needs or perceptions the child may express that are different form those of the parent. This lack of empathy and intolerance of interpersonal differences are the hallmarks of the child abuser.

For now, it is an unusual experience for a child victim of parental alienation behaviors to be removed from or protected from the abusive, intrusive parent. The parent's constitutional rights usually take precedence over the child's need for safety and security because there is not adequate proof or belief that the child needs protection. When a judge does see and understand the profound psychological damage to the child, they find themselves stuck for adequate intervention strategies. In most communities, there just are not adequate resources available to provide all members of an estranged and traumatized family with any hope of finding some peace and resolution. Hopefully, these community challenges will be addressed.

These real world realities and limitations do not change the fact that it's child abuse. Any parenting behavior engaged in with the intent of doing harm to a child's sense of love, safety and well-being in their family relationships is, in fact, child abuse. Perhaps it's time to just call it what it is instead of denying it. Like any real problem that interferes with a positive life, the first step to being able to solve a problem is to admit that it is a problem.