“For some time now I have been recording reports of more and more frequently involvement of children in decisions and conflicts arising from separation of their parents.”
This is the beginning of the letter from Regional Guarantor of Childhood and Adolescence, Vincenzo Giuliano, to the Presidents of 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 need for reorganization, the conflicts, the changes, the problems related to the economic sphere – continues the Guarantor – they must not distract attention from the needs and rights of their childrenabove all, to feel loved by both parents. A way should be found so that the Charter of Children’s Rights in the separation of parents, a handbook for parents facing the crisis of their union, put in place for a few years by the Guarantor Authority for Children and Adolescents, can influence the made parents 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 aim of the 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 manifesto and with the consequent listening to the Children’s Guarantor as a consultant in the custody phase”.
“Parents who, upon separation, accept and in the best case scenario jointly request shared or joint custody – states the Guarantor – they have the best intentions on paper to continue to deal with their children’s education 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, obstructionism by one of the two is not excluded. To translate shared custody into good educational practices, the signature of a judge is not sufficient, but memoranda of understanding signed at the time of separation are needed in which commitments, timetables, tasks to be accomplished by both. In some courts this ‘charter of good practices’ has become a fixed point, in others the majority, and this research demonstrates it, still rely on verbal resolutions and admonitions 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 fair, i.e. truly structured to ensure both parents have equal rights and equal duties, does shared custody work”.
