According to Statistics Canada, there are approximately 1.2 million separated Canadian parents who are caught up in some form of custodial arrangements (Statistics Canada). Due to the high number of separated parents, there have been numerous child custody battles in court, leading many to wonder which custodial arrangement is the most moral. In Canada, 85.9% of custodial agreements are exclusive to one of the parents (Canadian Department of Justice). 79.3% of custodial arrangements are in favor of the mother, whereas only 6.6% grant fathers exclusive custody (Canadian Department of Justice). Thus, there is a high percentage of exclusive arrangements, but according to utilitarianism, separated parents should have shared custody of their children.
…show more content…
This is plausible because when both parents have equivalent roles in the child’s life, they are sufficiently satisfied with their contribution to the child’s development (Bauserman 2012; 489). The most common ruling in custodial cases is sole maternal custody (Canadian Department of Justice). While it is true that mothers with sole-custody generally are more satisfied than those with joint custody, it is important to note that the latter experience “lower levels of parental stress” (Gunnoe and Braver 36). This can be attributed to the fact that in these agreements, the father often has similar child rearing responsibilities as the mother, which “[eliminates] the burdens of single parenting”, allowing for more leisure time (Pearson and Thoennes 233). Additionally, the dissatisfaction of mothers without complete custody over their children is believed to be unavoidable, since women often feel that their “legal role is out of proportion to their caregiving responsibilities” (Gunnoe and Braver 36). Women who are denied sole-custody of their children may feel that this arrangement does not take into consideration the strong mother-child bond initiated after birth (Gunnoe and Braver 36). The only resolution …show more content…
The relationships among family members are better in shared custody agreements compared to sole-custody ones. These improved relationships are a result of the additional free time each parent has to interact with his or her child (due to the sharing of parental duties) and of the co-operative relationship many separated couples develop in order to raise their infant properly. One of the main arguments against joint custody is that intense parental conflict is an unavoidable consequence thereof (Gunnoe and Braver 36). However, this has been disproven on a number of occasions. In King and Heard’s study on parental satisfaction and child well-being following parental separation, results show that parents with frequent visits/joint custodial agreements report incredibly low levels of conflict (King and Heard 389). Although the cause of these results remains uncertain, the authors of this study maintain that the reason “is likely to be linked to the viability of cooperative parenting arrangement” (King and Heard 387). The authors intend to accentuate the fact that by continuously caring for the child, both parents eventually realize that a cooperative parenting style is best for the child, thus making the relationship between the parents more cordial (King and Heard 387). Additionally, Luepnitz’s
This is plausible because when both parents have equivalent roles in the child’s life, they are sufficiently satisfied with their contribution to the child’s development (Bauserman 2012; 489). The most common ruling in custodial cases is sole maternal custody (Canadian Department of Justice). While it is true that mothers with sole-custody generally are more satisfied than those with joint custody, it is important to note that the latter experience “lower levels of parental stress” (Gunnoe and Braver 36). This can be attributed to the fact that in these agreements, the father often has similar child rearing responsibilities as the mother, which “[eliminates] the burdens of single parenting”, allowing for more leisure time (Pearson and Thoennes 233). Additionally, the dissatisfaction of mothers without complete custody over their children is believed to be unavoidable, since women often feel that their “legal role is out of proportion to their caregiving responsibilities” (Gunnoe and Braver 36). Women who are denied sole-custody of their children may feel that this arrangement does not take into consideration the strong mother-child bond initiated after birth (Gunnoe and Braver 36). The only resolution …show more content…
The relationships among family members are better in shared custody agreements compared to sole-custody ones. These improved relationships are a result of the additional free time each parent has to interact with his or her child (due to the sharing of parental duties) and of the co-operative relationship many separated couples develop in order to raise their infant properly. One of the main arguments against joint custody is that intense parental conflict is an unavoidable consequence thereof (Gunnoe and Braver 36). However, this has been disproven on a number of occasions. In King and Heard’s study on parental satisfaction and child well-being following parental separation, results show that parents with frequent visits/joint custodial agreements report incredibly low levels of conflict (King and Heard 389). Although the cause of these results remains uncertain, the authors of this study maintain that the reason “is likely to be linked to the viability of cooperative parenting arrangement” (King and Heard 387). The authors intend to accentuate the fact that by continuously caring for the child, both parents eventually realize that a cooperative parenting style is best for the child, thus making the relationship between the parents more cordial (King and Heard 387). Additionally, Luepnitz’s