“I have been recording for a long time, with more and more frequency, reports of children’s involvement in decisions and conflicts resulting from their parents’ separation”.
This is the beginning of letter from the Regional Guarantor for Children and Adolescents, Vincenzo Giuliano, to the Presidents of the Courts of Potenza, Matera, Lagonegro, to the President of the Juvenile Court of Potenza and for information to the Guarantor Authority for Children and Adolescents.
The Guarantor continues:
“The need for reorganization, conflicts, changes, problems related to the economic sphere must not divert attention from the needs and rights of children, especially to feel loved by both parents.
We should find a way why the Charter of Children’s Rights in the separation of parentshandbook for parents facing the crisis of their union, put in place for a few years by the Guarantor Authority for Children and Adolescents, could effectively influence parents to respect the rights of their children.
It would be the most awaited result for the affirmation and harmonization of a new culture of double parenting, aimed at the evolution of family law in the full and equal role and respect of separated parents, father and mother, alongside their children.
The purpose of protocol is to also give a voice to minor children of separated parents, through a strong collaboration between the Guarantor of Basilicata and the Courts of Basilicata and the Juvenile Court of Potenza which is expressed in two ways: with the obligation of separated parents to participate, in any case before the measures by the court, in the training course prepared by the Children’s Guarantor on the knowledge of the 10 principles enshrined in the aforementioned manifesto; and with the consequent listening to the Children’s Guarantor as a consultant in the custody phase.
It would also be an opportunity to proceed with taking measures on what emerged from a survey, conducted by Demographic Research, on over 9 thousand European children which shows how in our country only 2.6 percent of couples experience “fair” joint custodycompared to percentages of around 40% in the rest of Europe.
In fact, the survey cited on cases of shared custody in Italy gives us a picture that is not exactly idyllic the children of separated parents who would be the unhappiest in Europe: “If for a child of separated and/or divorced parents, maintaining a peaceful relationship with both parents means living in a positive and balanced way thanks to the support that, despite everything, mum and dad continue to provide, the children of separated Italians are among the unhappiest in Europe” AVVENIRE – FAMIGLIA of 18.04.2024”, I don’t see why this shouldn’t happen here too.
“Parents who, upon separation, accept and – in the best of cases – jointly request shared or joint custody, have on paper the best intentions to continue to deal with the education of their children in a positive and concrete way. On paper, of course.
Because it happens very often that, although shared custody is decided by the judge, educational co-responsibility is not achieved for many reasons, not excluding the obstructionism of one of the two… to translate shared custody into good educational practices, it is not enough the signature of a judge, but protocols of understanding signed at the time of separation are needed in which commitments, timetables and tasks to be carried out by both parties are indicated in detail.
In some courts this “charter of good practices” has become a fixed point, in others – the majority, and this research demonstrates it – we still rely on verbal resolutions and warnings which everyone then respects when and how they want.
Custody is therefore formally shared, but it is not “equitable”. In this case the adjective is more important than the noun.
Because only if it is “fair”, i.e. truly structured to ensure both parents have equal rights and equal duties, does shared custody work”.
