top of page

10 Things Family Court Gets Wrong About Child Rights


child rights

Family courts are often viewed as protectors of children’s best interests. Yet, despite their good intentions, they sometimes get it wrong, leaving children vulnerable and their rights neglected. When courts prioritize outdated practices or fail to consider the complexities of family dynamics, the ones who suffer most are the children caught in the middle.


Let’s break down the most critical mistakes family courts make when it comes to upholding children’s rights.


1. Prioritizing Parental Rights Over Children's Rights

Courts often focus on ensuring both parents have access to the child, even in situations where this may not serve the child's best interests. While parental rights are important, they should never overshadow a child’s right to safety, stability, and emotional well-being. Children are not a means to balance the scales of fairness between two adults.


2. Assuming "Equal Time" Is Always Best

The presumption that a 50/50 custody arrangement is ideal disregards critical factors like abuse, neglect, or significant differences in parenting abilities. Equal time may work in amicable divorces, but in high-conflict situations, it can place undue stress on children and expose them to harmful environments. 


3. Forcing a Relationship With an Uninvolved or Abusive Parent

Family courts often operate under the belief that every child benefits from having a relationship with both parents. While this can be true, it’s not universal. Forcing a child to bond with a parent who has been absent, neglectful, or abusive can lead to confusion, fear, and emotional trauma. Courts sometimes fail to acknowledge that a child’s well-being is tied to consistent, nurturing relationships, not simply biology. This practice undermines a child’s right to emotional safety and stability.


When legal proceedings require the submission of documentation or evidence to opposing counsel and the abusive parent, it can inadvertently place the child at heightened risk. This is especially concerning in cases where the child has disclosed sensitive information or abuse, as it may expose them to further harm or retaliation, undermining their safety and well-being.


4. Overlooking the Impact of High-Conflict Personalities 

Family courts often underestimate how high-conflict dynamics between parents harm children. Ongoing exposure to arguments, manipulation, or one parent’s attempts to hinder the parent-child relationship from the other can deeply affect a child’s mental health. Protective measures, such as supervised visitation or conflict-resolution mechanisms, are not always adequately implemented. This leaves the high-conflict co-parent in the position to become a repeat offender as they are not held to accountability outlined in agreements.  


5. Failing to Hear the Child's Voice

In many cases, courts exclude the child’s perspective from the decision-making process, citing concerns about putting the child in the middle. However, excluding their input entirely disregards their right to be heard. This is especially problematic when older children express clear preferences or concerns that are ignored.


child rights


6. Ignoring Financial Abuse and Instability

Family courts often overlook the profound impact financial abuse by one parent can have on a child’s well-being. When a parent withholds child support, conceals assets, or weaponizes money to manipulate the other parent, it destabilizes the child's environment. This financial instability may result in unmet basic needs, heightened stress, and a diminished quality of life. Furthermore, financially isolating a parent can hinder their ability to provide care, creating a coercive dynamic where one parent exerts control over the other’s survival. This undermines not only the well-being of the targeted parent but also the overall stability and security of the child.


7. Treating Children as Property

Coercive personalities in custody battles often treat children as pawns, using them to manipulate and control the other parent. This "ownership" mentality disregards the child’s well-being, viewing the child as an asset to be divided rather than an individual with their own needs. This dynamic fosters animosity between parents, destabilizing the child’s life and creating emotional distress. Children in these toxic environments often feel torn, anxious, and confused, and may develop attachment issues that impact their long-term emotional health. Professional intervention, clear boundaries, and legal accountability are crucial to protect the child's well-being in such situations.


8. Inadequate Investigation of Abuse Allegations

Courts often dismiss allegations of abuse in custody battles as mere tactics to gain an advantage in securing custody, which can lead to dangerous outcomes for children. This failure to thoroughly investigate abuse claims places children at risk of continued harm. Additionally, the lack of specialized training and adequate resources for evaluating allegations of physical, emotional, or sexual abuse exacerbates the issue. Courts may be unable to recognize the subtle signs of trauma or coercion, especially when the abuser manipulates the situation to appear innocent or minimize the severity of their behavior. Without proper assessments from trained professionals, children in these circumstances are at significant risk of enduring further psychological, emotional, or physical damage. Consequently, this system failure not only undermines the safety of vulnerable children but also perpetuates harmful patterns of abuse, leaving them in unsafe environments where they are deprived of the protection and care they desperately need.


child rights


9. Using Cookie-Cutter Parenting Plans

Generic custody agreements often overlook the unique dynamics and needs of each family, failing to offer the flexibility necessary for the well-being of children. Children’s needs vary significantly based on their age, temperament, developmental stage, and personal circumstances, and a one-size-fits-all approach simply doesn't address those complexities. For example, younger children may need more stability and frequent contact with both parents, while older children might benefit from more autonomy in scheduling and a deeper understanding of their emotional needs. In many cases, a generic agreement can result in an arrangement that is unstable, inappropriate, or even harmful, particularly if it fails to account for factors like a child's health, special needs, or the family’s broader emotional context. These rigid, standardized plans often exacerbate conflict, leaving both children and parents in a system that doesn’t adequately prioritize the child's best interests, leading to stress, confusion, and potentially damaging long-term effects. To truly support children, custody agreements need to be individually tailored, taking into account all of the complex factors that affect their well-being.


10. Lack of Long-Term Accountability

After court orders are issued, there is often little follow-up to ensure compliance or evaluate how the arrangements are affecting the child. This lack of accountability leaves children vulnerable to continued conflict or neglect.


The Emotional Cost of Getting It Wrong

When family courts make these mistakes, children are left to bear the emotional burden. They may feel unheard, unsafe, or forced into relationships that cause harm. Worse, they can grow up believing their needs and feelings are secondary to the desires of the adults around them.


Family courts have the power to shape a child’s future. By addressing these critical issues, they can better fulfill their mandate to prioritize the rights and well-being of children. Let’s hope for a shift that places kids exactly where they should be—at the heart of every decision.


If you need further assistance with your case and getting your child's needs heard, please sign up for a consult.

Comentarios


2.png
Journal copy.png
bottom of page