July 2000

Review of the 1999 Parenting Act Study

by Diane N. Lye, Ph.D. and Mary Wechsler

In 1998, the Washington State Supreme Court Gender and Justice Commission and the Domestic Relations Commission contracted with Diane Lye, Ph.D., a researcher with extensive experience in the field of family and gender studies, to study the results of the Parenting Act which went into effect January 1, 1988 and is enacted into RCW 26.09. The Parenting Act was a major revision of our state's laws relating to the parenting of children after divorce or separation. Although its provisions were substantially different than the laws of other states when it went into effect, other states have subsequently enacted or are enacting similar laws based on the Washington Parenting Act.

The approximately 200-page study had four different components. One component consisted of 10 focus groups of parents throughout the state who had court-approved parenting plans.

The second study component consisted of in-depth, open-ended interviews with 47 professionals working with the Parenting Act, including judges, court commissioners, attorneys, family law facilitators, mental health professionals, parenting evaluators, guardians ad litem and activists. The major findings were strong support of the policy goals of the Parenting Act, and beliefs that the process of obtaining parenting plans is extremely difficult for parents, that few plans are individually tailored, and that joint decision-making doesn't work well.

The third component was a standardized analysis of a representative sampling of recent final parenting plans from eight counties selected to represent social and economic diversity. Forty-five percent of the plans provided for a primary residential parent and an every-other-weekend schedule for the other parent. Three-quarters of first-plan, primary residential parents were mothers. Just a handful of plans provided for more alternative residential time than every other weekend, including 50/50 schedules. One-fifth of the plans included restrictions on one parent's residential time, yet one-third of these plans had every-other-weekend schedules. Nearly one in every five plans had no specified residential schedule, leaving it to be agreed between parents or between the parents and the child. Three-quarters of plans specified joint decision-making.

The fourth study component was a critical review of scholarly research on post-divorce parenting and child well-being. Findings include the following: 1) No single post-divorce residential schedule has been demonstrated to be the most beneficial for children; 2) Absent high levels of parental conflict, there are no significant disadvantages or advantages to children of shared or 50/50 residential schedules; 3) Parental conflict is a major source of reduced well-being among children of divorce; 4) Shared or 50/50 residential schedules have adverse consequences for children in high conflict situations and do not promote parental cooperation; and 5) Increased non-residential parents' involvement in their children's lives may enhance well-being by improving the economic support of the children.

Dr. Lye concluded that the three most important findings of her study are the following:

The findings indicate that most divorcing parents are able to develop a workable parenting plan and reach a working day-to-day relationship. These parents who are designated as "successful" use their parenting plans as a fall-back arrangement; their day-to-day parenting arrangements are flexible and responsive to their own and their children's changing needs. Typically, both parents have ongoing involvement in their children's lives.

Dr. Lye's interviews with Washington parents and professionals who have worked with the Parenting Act expressed strong support for the stated goal of the Parenting Act: Post-dissolution parenting arrangements should be based on the best interests of the children. These groups also strongly endorse the goal of involvement by both parents after a dissolution of marriage, as well as the goal of clearly defined, specific post-dissolution parenting arrangements that are tailored to the needs of the individual child and family.

The study found that child development and post-divorce parenting experts agree that different families and children have different needs for post-dissolution parenting, and the Parenting Act provides for an individualized approach. Child development and post-divorce parenting experts also agree that the best interests of most children are served by the continued involvement of both parents, and the Parenting Act provides for ongoing involvement by both parents. Experts conclude that 50/50 or approximately 50/50 parenting arrangements are only appropriate where parents have good relations, but can harm children where parental relations are conflicted. The Parenting Act (at least theoretically) limits these arrangements to families where parental cooperation is high.

Dr. Lye recommends that despite these strong, positive findings, additional steps be taken to better serve Washington families. These include the following:

• Parents should be provided with more information about court procedures, the purpose and goals of the Parenting Act, suggested language for parenting plans and language to avoid, creative residential schedules, joint decision-making provisions, and dispute resolution processes.

Dr. Lye suggested information could be disseminated in a variety of ways, including parenting classes with practical information; workshops for divorcing parents; helpful pages on the website of the Office of the Administrator for the Courts, including frequently asked questions; extended instructions distributed with parenting plan forms; and helpful telephone or e-mail lines.

• More creativity and individualizing of parenting plans should be encouraged. The study concluded that too many Washington parents have "cookie cutter" parenting plans that are primarily every-other-weekend residential schedules, which does not meet the needs of all families. Dr. Lye suggested encouraging individualizing parenting plans by disseminating information about diverse residential schedules to attorneys, judges, court commissioners, guardians ad litem, court facilitators, and other professionals involved in the formulation of parenting plans.

Dr. Lye concluded that encouraging individualization of parenting plans is consistent with the Parenting Act's goal of encouraging approaches that serve the best interest of each individual child.

• Protections should be strengthened and services improved for survivors of domestic violence. The research showed that survivors of domestic violence reported a particularly difficult time accessing the court system and securing parenting plans that adequately protected their safety. Dr. Lye concluded that these problems were most likely related to the way the Parenting Act is implemented, rather than to shortcomings in the Act itself.

Suggested improvements include developing special packets of information tailored to the needs of domestic violence victims; informing them of their right not to participate in programs that may be dangerous to them (such as parenting classes and mediation with both parents present), and explaining how to opt out of these programs; improving awareness of issues relating to domestic violence among professionals working in the civil justice system; and encouraging courts to clarify policies regarding domestic violence.

Suggestions also included improving security for parents working to develop a parenting plan, not permitting "as agreed," 50/50 residential schedules and joint decision-making in families with a history of domestic violence, and clarifying which agencies and individuals are appropriate as supervisors of alternate residential time and exchanges of children. The study concludes that when domestic violence is alleged or suspected, an immediate investigation of the charges should be ordered, including a risk assessment of the potential danger and an early comprehensive parenting evaluation by a single outside evaluator.

• The mandatory parenting plan forms should be improved. Dr. Lye discovered that several different versions of these forms are in circulation and use, and concluded that all are difficult to use. Her recommendations included enhancing the layout and graphic design of the form; improving standardization; providing comprehensive directions for completing the form on the form itself; and including information about whether this is a first or modified plan, the place of residence of the parents, and whether the parents were pro se litigants.

• Restrictions on shared or 50/50 residential schedules should be maintained and clarified. The report recommends that since child development and post-divorce parenting experts agree that 50/50, or approximately 50/50, residential schedules can harm children when parental relations are conflicted, this information (together with the information about the limits the Parenting Act places on shared or 50/50 residential schedules) should be disseminated to parents and professionals working in the civil justice system. Dr. Lye concluded that, while these schedules should be supported for families where they are agreed to and are practical, they should not be permitted in families where parental relations are conflicted.

• "As agreed" plans should be discouraged. Dr. Lye concluded that plans that do not specify a residential schedule, but leave arrangements to be agreed between parents or between the child and the parents, were contrary to both the spirit and the letter of the Parenting Act, should be discouraged, and should never be approved for families with a history of domestic violence or conflicted parental relations.

• The routine use of joint decision-making in parenting plans should be reconsidered. The study found that most parents do not adhere to the joint decision-making provisions in their plans, and most professionals believe these provisions can promote conflict. She recommended that parents be provided with more information about joint decision-making and encouraged to formulate individualized plans, rather than routinely adopting joint decision-making.

• The report recommended that dispute resolution provisions should be enhanced by providing detailed, step-by-step directions for invoking the dispute resolution mechanism.

• Monitoring and enforcement of parenting plan provisions should be strengthened. The report recommended that the authority of the court to deal with enforcement be clarified, and that parents be provided with clear information on how to report violations of the parenting plan and how to seek enforcement.

• Efforts to improve the standard of practice for professionals working with the Parenting Act should be supported. The report recommended enhancing professional standards of practice through state, national and international professional organizations that provide training, accreditation and codes of conduct for mediators, guardians ad litem, parenting evaluators and parenting class instructors.

• The situation with regard to relocation of the primary residential parent should be clarified. This recommendation appears to have been implemented with the recent passage of HB2884.

• Parenting classes should be enhanced. Dr. Lye found these classes to be quite valuable and recommended holding classes in locations and at times that are more easily accessible.

This report is a comprehensive and much needed summary of what is right and what needs improvement with Washington's laws regarding the parenting of children after a divorce or separation. It is also a good source of information on how parenting plans are actually working, and a survey of the latest professional assessments on provisions for children after a divorce or separation. The report has been provided to Superior Court judges and commissioners. The entire report can be obtained from the Office of the Administrator for the Courts (OAC) by e-mailing Gender.justice@courts.wa.gov or calling 360-705-5290. The website for the OAC is http://www.courts.wa.gov/.

Diane N. Lye is the author of the 1999 Washington State Parenting Act Study. She has over 15 years' experience in the field of family research and is the author of numerous scholarly articles. She was educated at the London School of Economics and the University of Pennsylvania, where she earned her Ph.D. in 1989.

Mary Wechsler is a partner in the firm of Wechsler, Becker, Erickson, Ross, Roubik, and Edwards LLP, where she practices family law. She is a member of the Supreme Court Domestic Relations Commission and a former chair of the Family Law Section.

Back to table of contents >>