Month: June 2014

Would your relationship benefit from $200 worth of relationship counselling or education? Could you do with some assistance around communication, intimacy or managing differences?   

On July 1, the Federal Government will begin trialling the Stronger Relationships program. The program aims to provide 100,000 couples with access to a $200 subsidy for counselling or education services.

The subsidy can be used by couples to seek help with preparation for committed relationships, intimacy, marriage and relationship milestones such as becoming parents, economic changes and step-parenting.

The subsidy will be available to couples who are married, intending to marry or who are in committed relationships, and includes de-facto and same-sex couples. 

Evidence tells us that people in healthy relationships and their children are likely to live longer, report fewer health problems and use health and wellbeing services substantially less than people in distressed relationships. So it makes social and economic sense to invest in strengthening relationships.  

For more than 60 years, Relationships Australia Queensland has been providing couples with counselling and education. We are experienced relationship educators and welcome the Government’s commitment to early intervention for couples.

Relationships Australia Queensland will be offering a relationship education program that is covered by the subsidy and is flexible to our client’s needs. The education program is evidence based and was developed by a team of psychologists led by Professor Kim Halford, an internationally renowned couples expert and clinical psychologist.    

CEO of Relationships Australia Queensland, Shane Klintworth, said,

“Couples and families benefit when they have the skills to manage difficult times in their relationships. The Federal Government’s vouchers will provide couples with access to education that will build those skills and ultimately enhance relationships.” 

If you would like to register your interest in the $200 counselling and education subsidy program please fill out this form. We will forward more information once full details are announced by the Federal Government.  

For more information visit Department of Social Services website.

Divorce hurts. Divorce can hurt in many ways – children, families, society. But in writing those two words, divorce hurts, I am not thinking about broad concerns. I am thinking about the pain of rejection, of longing, and of loneliness. I am thinking about the deep emotional hurt of divorce, emotional pain that often feels like physical pain. You feel like you have been stabbed in the chest, or maybe in the back. You feel horrible emptiness in your stomach or intense pressure on your chest or just like you’re going to explode.

Here’s an interesting and important observation about emotional pain and why it feels physical. As psychologists Geoff MacDonald and Mark Leary detailed in a Psychological Bulletin article a couple of years ago, the same brain regions involved in experiencing physical pain apparently are involved in experiencing emotional pain. So, expressions like “hurt feelings” are more than an analogy. Emotional pain hurts. Literally

Rejection hurts.

The pain of lost love is deep, and it aches all the more because of the many complications involved in divorce, especially divorce with children. And the searing pain causes other problems. A big one is anger.

We are “hard-wired” by evolution to respond to pain with anger. You can readily observe this in animal behaviour – and in your behaviour. Be careful around an injured dog. It might bite. Why? The dog is in pain and is prepared to hurt back, to defend itself, even if you are trying to help. When an animal is attacked and injured, it is adaptive to fight back, even blindly. Fighting back is adaptive for immediate survival – and for survival of the species.

Or think about your own behaviour. How do you react when you stub your toe? You probably get mad. And if you’re furious enough, you might even kick the offending piece of furniture again, this time on purpose. Now there’s a reaction psychologists cannot explain as learned behaviour. We’re talking hard-wired emotion and emotional responses.

Rejection hurts. Pain makes us angry. In our primal rage, we want to hurt back.

And there is one more complication. Anger makes us hurt less.

Think about it. This makes complete sense from an evolutionary perspective. Pain impedes self-defense. Anger shuts out pain, physiologically and behaviourally. Think about wounded soldiers who fight on and on, only realizing that they have been shot after the battle is over. In laboratory experiments, animals will tolerate more pain (electric shock) if they are given the opportunity to attack another animal. Anger shuts out pain, including emotional pain. So part of the reason people stay angry at an ex is to sooth their own pain. Being angry is easier than being hurt.

Rejection hurts. Pain makes us angry. In our primal rage, we want to hurt back. Our rage makes us hurt less.

And this is a recipe for disaster if you are divorced with children. Children can be, and often are, wounded in their parents’ emotional crossfire, by the anger and primitive desire to hurt back, feelings and actions that stem from parents’ own, deep emotional pain. If you cannot understand children’s predicament intuitively, if you cannot put yourself in their shoes, I ask you to trust me on this one for the time being. In another blog, I will give you lots of examples and refer to long traditions of research on the problems of children caught in the middle.

If the pain-anger-hurt back circuit is “hard-wired,” we cannot help ourselves, right? Wrong. At least some degree of emotional control is possible. We can use the big part of our brain, our cortex, to help us regulate our “little brain,” those subcortical, emotional structures and circuits that we share with other animals. We cannot control our feelings. We cannot make the pain of divorce disappear, as much as we might like to. But we can use our whole brain, not just the primitive part of it, to understand our feelings and control our actions. Pain may set off a primitive impulse to hurt back, but we do not need to act on it.

If you do not have children, you can indulge your anger in divorce, or in any emotional break-up for that matter. You can scream, “I never want to see you again,” and believe you mean it. If you do not have children, you don’t need to think more deeply than that.

But if you have children, you need to put them ahead of your emotions. How? Embrace your pain. Look inside, past your anger, and let yourself feel the pain. Look for something to heal the hurt that’s more adaptive than anger. Talk about your pain, write about it, consult a therapist. Doing this is emotionally unnatural. I get that. But even though it hurts more, feeling the pain behind the anger also is emotionally more honest.

***********************

Robert E. Emery, Ph.D. is a Professor of Psychology and well regarded international practice-based researcher. His research about the often overlooked, intense emotional cost of separation and divorce for children and parents is extensively cited around the world.

In July, we are honoured to be hosting Dr Emery on a tour of Queensland, to give a series of lectures, including the 15/16 July 2014 in Brisbane, entitled “The Truth About Children and Divorce.” Not afraid of controversy, Dr Emery will invite you to discuss his research on topics including infant overnights, randomised trials of mediated and litigated child custody disputes, and coparenting conflict and attachment.

Dr Emery’s explanation of high emotion, especially anger, has helped many family mediators deal with emotion in the room and also to understand how the length of separation affects and predicts behavior. The connection between how adults handle their emotions at separations and the effects on their children is the key Dr Emery can use to unlock many puzzles for mediators, family lawyers and other workers in the separation field.

Blog post originally published on February 23, 2009 by Robert E. Emery, Ph.D.

I am a big advocate for joint physical custody. If at all possible, I want children to spend a lot of time – and have good relationships – with both of their parents after a separation or divorce. But there are several problems and potential pitfalls with joint physical custody. I touch on the most important in this entry, including:

• For children, joint physical custody is the best and the worst arrangement.

• Joint physical custody is a lousy “compromise” between disputing parents.

• Joint physical custody is being used, wrongly, to lower child support payments.

• Joint physical custody is not necessarily 50/50.

• Joint physical custody requires a lot of logistical coordination.

• Joint physical custody is less stable over time than sole physical custody.

• Joint physical custody apparently works only for a minority of families.

Before addressing these points, let me be clear about terms. Different people, and different laws in different states and countries, use different words: “custody,” “parenting plan,” “parental rights and responsibilities” etc. I have no investment in a particular term. Parents living apart need to decide how to divide children’s time between two households (physical custody), and they also need to decide how they will make big and small childrearing decisions (legal custody). So, you can call these issues “time” and “decisions,” and drop the sometimes controversial term “custody” altogether. I sometimes do just that, but use “custody” here as convenient shorthand.

Another clarification: I think sharing big decisions – joint legal custody – is a no-brainer. Joint legal custody should be a presumption unless there are good reasons not to do it. But note the “big decisions” qualifier. Joint legal custody does not mean that parents get to second guess each other constantly. More on this in a coming blog.

Finally, a little preface about why I like joint physical custody philosophically. Children have two parents. Most children want to have a relationship with both of their parents after a separation, and most divorced parents want relationships with their children. Family relationships can and do continue despite the many upheavals of divorce. The old model of divorce as a family feud, where only one parent raises and “owns” the children is, well, the old model. Divorced parents can be parents even if they are no longer lovers.

I am a big advocate for joint physical custody. But…

BUT joint physical custody is the best and the worst arrangement for children. It’s the best when parents can cooperate enough to make joint physical custody work for children. It’s the worst when joint physical custody leaves children in the middle of a war zone. The best research supports this conclusion. In low or controlled conflict divorces, children fare better in joint than in sole physical custody. In high conflict divorces, children do worse in joint physical custody than in other arrangements. Admittedly, existing research is imperfect and very hard to do. But this “best and worst” conclusion also is commonly held by seasoned practitioners, and it makes good common sense.

BUT joint physical custody is a lousy compromise for disputing parents. Why? Because joint physical custody is the best and worst arrangement for children, and it’s all but certain to be the worst when parents end up in court (because the parents, by definition, aren’t working together). For judges, this means that joint physical custody may seem like a fair middle ground, but that’s an illusion that keeps kids trapped in the middle. For parents who want it, this means you have to try to work out joint physical custody with your children’s other parent, because wise judges already know it’s a lousy compromise for children in high conflict divorces.

BUT joint physical custody is being used wrongly to lower child support payments. In my home state, Virginia, for example, child support schedules define joint physical custody as having 90 overnights per year with your child (for the purpose of calculating reduced child support payments). It’s truly amazing how many parents insist that they need 90 overnights with their children. (The magic number differs from state to state, and so do many parents’ demands…) If you really want 90, or more, overnights with your children, let’s talk. If you really want to pay less child support, well, sorry, but raising children is expensive.

BUT joint physical custody is not necessarily 50/50. When I hear a parent insisting on exactly 50/50, I really worry. I worry that the parent is thinking about getting his or her half of the pie, not about the children. Sure, 50/50 can work. So can lots of different schedules. I consider about 25% of overnights as being joint physical custody in terms of having enough opportunity to have a rich relationship with your children. That might mean a schedule that is a week on and a week off, Wednesday through Saturday, every Thursday and Friday over night, or dividing the school year and the summers. And there are a million other options, many of which I discuss in my book, The Truth about Children and Divorce.

BUT joint physical custody requires a lot of logistical coordination. Kids forget stuff. Be prepared to drive soccer cleats or the tuba or the antibiotic to your ex’s house. Oh yeah, and kids take short cuts. Be prepared to communicate regularly with your children’s other parent. What about? Not about your own stuff. About your kids’ stuff. Homework. Weekend plans. Discipline. Stuff like that.

BUT joint physical custody is less stable over time than sole physical custody. Several studies show this. And this isn’t necessarily a problem. Kids’ needs and desires change. So do parents’ needs and desires. People move. New partners get involved. The changes can make a lot of sense, and changes can make things work better. So file this concern under “something for parents to consider” not under “why you don’t want joint physical custody.”

BUT joint physical custody apparently works only for a minority of families. At any one point in time, maybe 10% of children from divorced families are actually living in joint physical custody. (There really isn’t great research here, but even the highest estimates I’ve seen aren’t much bigger.) Why is the number small compared to the amount of talk about joint physical custody? I think it’s for all the reasons I’ve discussed. Joint physical custody is definitely an option to consider – it’s my preferred option for cooperative parents. But it’s only one of many options that can work for divorced parents and for children.

 

***********************

Robert E. Emery, Ph.D. is a Professor of Psychology and well regarded international practice-based researcher. His research about the often overlooked, intense emotional cost of separation and divorce for children and parents is extensively cited around the world.

In July, we are honoured to be hosting Dr Emery on a tour of Queensland, to give a series of lectures, including the 15/16 July 2014 in Brisbane, entitled “The Truth About Children and Divorce.” Not afraid of controversy, Dr Emery will invite you to discuss his research on topics including infant overnights, randomised trials of mediated and litigated child custody disputes, and coparenting conflict and attachment.

Dr Emery’s explanation of high emotion, especially anger, has helped many family mediators deal with emotion in the room and also to understand how the length of separation affects and predicts behavior. The connection between how adults handle their emotions at separations and the effects on their children is the key Dr Emery can use to unlock many puzzles for mediators, family lawyers and other workers in the separation field.

Blog post originally published on May 18, 2009 by Robert E. Emery, Ph.D.