New Study, Case May Help California Children of Divorce
Retain Bonds with Both Parents
June 11, 2003
One of the greatest tragedies children of divorce in California face
is the way courts allow custodial parents to move hundreds or even thousands
of miles away after divorce, damaging or sometimes destroying the bonds
between children and their noncustodial parents. However, new research
and a case pending before the California Supreme Court may change that.
In the case of In re: Marriage of Lamusga, a Contra Costa County
custodial mother seeks to move out of state with her two young boys and
her new husband. The boys' father, who enjoys joint legal but not joint
physical custody, seeks to block the move, arguing that it is not in his
children's best interest because it will damage their relationship with
him. The mother, who first tried to move to Ohio, now seeks to relocate
to Arizona in order to provide her new husband with better career opportunities.
Since the 1996 Burgess decision California custodial parents, usually
mothers, have had the presumptive right to move. However, according to
Arizona State University researcher Sanford Braver, this decision and
others like it were made in a "vacuum" of information on the long-term
effects of move-aways.
Braver and his ASU colleagues Ira Ellman and William Fabricius have begun
to fill this vacuum with a newly released study which shows that move-aways
are correlated with damaging long-term consequences for children. The
study, published in the June 2003 issue of the Journal of Family Psychology,
found that among 14 variables related to a young adult's overall well-being,
move-away status was correlated to significant, negative impact in 11
of them.
These negative consequences include: greater inner turmoil and distress
from parents' divorce; health problems, particularly in the case of girls;
more hostility in interpersonal relationships; negative feelings towards
their parents; greater conflict between divorced parents; and greater
problems in general life satisfaction and personal and emotional adjustment.
Not surprisingly, financial support, including financial support for college
expenses given voluntarily by the noncustodial parent, was significantly
higher when children grew up within a one hour drive of their noncustodial
parent.
The study, conducted from a pool of 2,067 college students enrolled in
an introductory level class at a large university, may even understate
the damage of move-aways. As the survey's authors point out, many of the
children most damaged by divorce and alienation from their noncustodial
parents were not measured because they probably never made it as far as
college.
The study's results also indict noncustodial fathers who move away from
their children, finding that such move-aways are also correlated with
long-term negative consequences for children. Noncustodial fathers often
justify their moves by arguing that the custodial mother is already denying
them access to the children anyway, or that these moves are necessitated
by their child support obligations. The second claim, however, is no more
legitimate than custodial mothers' claims that moving helps them financially.
While the study's findings on move-aways are new, studies documenting
the disastrous effects of fatherlessness on children are not. Research
shows that the largest single factor in predicting whether a child will
graduate high school, attend college, become involved in crime or drugs,
or get pregnant before age 18 is the presence (or absence) of a father
in the child's life. Studies show that this remains true even after adjustments
for household income.
The Burgess decision and others like it ignore the fact that children
need more from their fathers than a check in the mail--they need the love,
guidance and strength which fathers provide. Allowing a custodial parent
to move away often removes one of the two people in the world who love
a child the most from that child's life. How could that be in a child's
best interest?
Glenn Sacks
This column first appeared in the Pasadena
Star-News & Affiliated Papers (6/5/03).
