North Dakota Rewriting Custody Law

From: Grand Forks Herald

“The bill requires parents who are divorcing to create a parenting plan that will spell out each one’s rights and how they will each carry out their different responsibilities. It can be as detailed or general as the parents want.”

From what I understand this bill world require parents to create a parenting plan that spells out each other’s right and how they’ll each carry out their responsibilities.

This will be a comprehensive parenting plan that leaves no stone unturned. In other words, parents will have to work together, raising their children just as they would if there had never been a divorce.

According to Sen. Connie Triplett, D-Grand Forks; a new law can’t “force” someone to be cooperative or “nice” in creating a parenting plan. So true, concern for a child’s welfare and well-being can’t be forced but I have no problem with the courts attempting to force the issue.

There are parents who do grave harm to their children because they are angry at their ex. Their only concern is getting back at the ex and the anger they feel clouds their judgment and keeps them from seeing the harm they do their children.

I’m all for the courts helping someone see and think more clearly…especially when their behavior means negative consequences for their children. In my opinion, North Dakota should take it a step further and throw parents who refuse to co-parent in jail.

They throw parents in jail for not paying child support. Why not throw them in jail for behaviors that can be proven emotionally detrimental to their child? Nurturing our children emotionally is far more important than providing for them financially.

Sure, they need a roof over their heads and food in their tummies. But, if parents are using them as pawns and disregarding their emotional needs no amount of financial support is going to take away the life-long problems a child will deal with because his/her parents couldn’t manage to co-parent with an ex.

Dr. Warren Farrell says, “men who are involved with their children are 92 percent more likely to pay their child support.”

Imagine a bill that would force mothers who stand in the way of a father having the right to father their child and the implications if Dr. Farrell is correct. It could possibly kill two birds with one stone. It would keep fathers involved in their children’s live and motivate them to pay court ordered child support. The same theory applies to mothers who pay child support.

What a novel concept. If parents who refuse to co-parent and put their child’s best interest first were held responsible by the court or sentenced to jail time, the jails would be full.

From my experience in working with divorcing clients, a refusal to co-parent is a far greater problem than non-payment of child support. The actual “best interest of the child” has been held hostage by the courts belief that financial child support trumps emotional child support.

Maybe the courts are finally realizing this and moving in a direction that means children of divorce will be taken care of both emotionally and financially.