Latest / Divorce Coaches Academy / Beyond Being Heard: Children’s Voices and the PARENT Framework
Transcript
- Tracy Callahan: Welcome back to Divorce Coaches Academy. I'm Tracy. And today I want to talk about something again that comes up in almost every co-parenting conversation I'm part of. Whether I'm sitting in the divorce coach's seat or the mediator's seat or working as a parenting coordinator. It's this question of where the children are in all of this, right? Not where they live, not whose weekend it is. I mean where their voice is. Because here's what I hear from parents all the time. And I'm going to gather you hear it too. One parent basically says, I don't want the kids involved. I'm protecting them. And the other parent says, Well, the kids should have a say. They're old enough. And very quickly, guess what happens? The children's voice becomes one more thing the parents are fighting about. So we end up with this either or situation. Either we keep children completely out of it to protect them, or we just hand over them the decision that was never theirs to carry. And if you ask me, neither of those is good for children. And I certainly know neither one reduces conflict. So I'm going to tell you up front where I land. And for those of you that listen to me, should know this. Too often. Children get pulled into processes they never needed to be part of. Interviews, evaluations, being asked which house they prefer. And very often, the conversation that child actually needed could have happened at home with one parent who was ready to listen. No loyalty conflict, no competition between the parents to win. Just a parent and a child. I recently had the pleasure of reading an article by Dr. Michael Saini, who is a professor at the University of Toronto and someone many of us in Family Dispute Resolution have learned from for years. In it, he walks through a new 2026 systematic review on children's participation and divorce-related decisions. It put words to something I see every week. So, this is what I'd like to do today. First, I'm going to share what that research tells us in plain language. Then I'll connect it to the work we do with individual parents using DCA's parent framework. And at the end, I'm going to tell you about our course that starts next week because this is exactly the kind of skill we build in it. So let's start with this research. The review Dr. Saini discusses was published this year in the journal Family Transitions by a group of authors. They pulled together 46 studies from the last 25 years. They looked at how children experience being included or not included in decisions at home, in court, and in mediation. They also looked at how participation connects to how children adjust after divorce. The headline finding won't surprise anyone who works with families. There is a real gap between how much children want to be part of these decisions and how much they actually get to shape them. But the details are where it gets useful for us. And I'm going to pull out some of these ideas, basically four of them. Okay. One, children want a voice, not the verdict. This is the piece I want every parent to hear. Across the studies, children said they wanted to know what was happening, to be asked, and to have their input taken seriously, especially about where they live, their relationships, and their daily routines. But they were also super clear that they didn't want to be the ones making the final call. Children drew the line themselves. Adults decide, children contribute. That matters because so much of the fighting between parents assumes there are only two options shield them completely or let them choose. The children in this research are describing a third option. And honestly, it's a more mature one than many of the adults are offering. Think about why they want in. They're the ones who will live inside whatever schedule gets agreed on or ordered. A parent may be thinking about the drive time or the holiday rotation. The children is thinking about their best friend, their soccer team, whether the dog can come. Okay. Two, being asked is not the same as being heard. The review looks at participation in three layers, right? Does the child get information about what's going on? Do they get a chance to express their view? And does that view have any real effect on the decision? You can check the box in the second layer and miss the other two entirely. A child gets interviewed, says what they think, and then never learns what happened or why. From the child's side, that can feel worse than not being asked at all. And Dr. Saini makes an important balancing point here. Influence doesn't mean the child gets their way. Safety, development, and the needs of the whole family still have to be weighed and considered. But the child should be able to see what their view is actually considered and get an explanation that makes sense for their age. Right? Silly. Okay, three, where the conversation happens changes what a child will say. At home, participation can grow naturally through everyday conversations. But children often hold back because they don't want to hurt a parent or set off another argument. Having permission to speak isn't the same as feeling free to speak. In court, the formal mechanisms exist. But children often don't understand the process or know whether they what they said mattered. And in mediation, the evidence is much smaller, but children who took part directly tended to describe it more positively. The authors suggest that a less adversarial setting and a facilitative professional may help. They are careful though not to claim this is right for every child or every family. Okay, four. Participation and protection are not opposites. This one goes right to the heart of what we do. Many adults keep children out because they worry about loyalty binds and putting kids in the middle. Those risks are certainly real, especially in high conflict families. But the review points out that shutting children out has cost too. Children who live with conflict often have the most important things to say about their safety and their relationships. And they are often the least likely to say them. So the goal isn't to choose between protecting children and including them. The goal is to give them a way to be heard without making them manage their parents' disagreement or own the outcome. In the studies that looked at outcomes, participation was generally linked. With children being more satisfied with their arrangements and adjusting better. The authors connect this to self-determination theory, right? People do better when they have some sense of autonomy, competence, and connection. Now I want to be careful here, and so are the authors. Most of this evidence is qualitative. It shows a relationship, not proof that participation causes better adjustment. Families where children are included may also be families with less conflict to begin with. So this isn't a formula, it's a direction. And Dr. Saini closes this article with a question for professionals. How do we tell the difference between real participation and a consultation that just satisfies the procedure? And I want to take that question one step further into the divorce coaching room. Most of the research on children's voices focuses on formal settings. Again, the courtroom, the evaluator's office, the mediation table. Those matter. But think about where children actually spend their lives. At home, in the car, at the kitchen table, at bedtime. The review reminds us that at home, the parent is the one who decides whether a child's voice Gets space. The parent decides whether the child gets information, whether their view is invited, and whether it actually shapes anything. And here's the hard part: a parent in the middle of conflict is often the least able to do that well. Think about it when you're hurt, angry, or scared. It's very easy to hear your child's words as evidence for your side. See? Even she doesn't want to go, or to dismiss them because they sound like the other parent talking. That's where we come in. As divorce coaches, dispute resolution specialists, working with one parent. We cannot control the other household, but we can help the parent in front of us become someone their child can actually talk to. And we can help them carry their child's perspective into mediation and the parenting plan, not as a weapon, but as information. And before I get into the framework, I want to stay right here for a few minutes. This is the part of today's conversation I feel most strongly about. Here's where I stand. Most children's voices do not need a courtroom, an evaluator's office, or even a mediation table to be heard. Many of these conversations can happen at home between one child and a parent. Think about what it's like for a child to be pulled into a formal process. Someone they barely know asks them questions about their family. They know their answers will find their way back to their parents. And they know, because children always know that mom is hoping for one answer and dad is hoping for another. That's a loyalty conflict built right into the structure. Whatever the child says, somebody loses. And that child feels responsible for it. Now, picture the same child at the kitchen table or in the car on the way to practice. One parent asks, How's the new schedule feeling for you? And then the parent simply listens. There's no other parent in the room to please or protect. There's no contest between the adults to see whose version wins. Nobody is writing anything down for a judge. It's a parent being curious about their child's life. That is participation, my friends, in the most natural form. And notice that all three layers from the research can happen right there. The parent explains what's changing in words that fit the child's age. The child shares what it's like for them. Then the parent carries that forward and comes back later to say, I hurt you. And here's what we decided. But there's one condition, and it's a big one. This only works when the parent's goal is to understand, not to win. The moment a parent uses these conversations to build a case, the kitchen table turns into a deposition. Tell me again what happened at dad's. Did mom say anything about me? The child feels the shift immediately. They either go quiet or they start telling each parent what the parent wants to hear. And now we have the same loyalty conflict, just in a different room. The review backs this up. Children at home often hold back so they don't upset a parent or set off another fight. So a safe conversation at home isn't automatic. The parent has to build it. That's a skill. And it's one we can coach. What does building it look like? Well, a few things I come back to with parents again and again. Don't ask your child to carry messages, keep secrets, or pick a side. Don't ask for details about the other household. Ask about your child's experience. When your child says something critical about the other parent, listen without piling on. When they say something positive, let them without flinching. Say out loud that grown-ups will make the decision so your child knows the weight isn't on them. Follow up. Let them see that what they told you mattered. Now I want to be fair about this, right? There are times when a formal process is exactly right. When there are safety concerns, abuse, or family violence, when a child can't speak freely at home, when parents are so locked in that no home conversation is possible. In those situations, a child specialist, a therapist, a guardian adlitum, or a child inclusion mediation can protect a child's voice. And the review found that children who took part in mediation generally described it again, positively. So my point isn't never. My point is just not first and not by default. A formal process should be a deliberate choice made for this child. It should never be a tactic in the parents' dispute. And here's a red flag I listen for. When a parent says, let's just have the judge ask the kids, or let her decide when she wants to live, that usually tells me the adults are looking for a Tiebreaker. Children should never be a tiebreaker. So how do we help a parent become the person their child can actually talk to? That's where the parent framework comes in. Now let me walk you through it with the child's voice as the lens. For those of you who are new to it, parent, P-A-R-E-N-T, is the framework we developed at Divorce Coaches Academy for helping one parent change a conflict pattern. Whether or not the other parent ever cooperates. Six steps. And here's how each one looks when we bring the child's voice into it. P. Pause and identify the pattern. Conflict repeats. So the first step is helping the parent step back from the latest incident and see the cycle. With the child in mind, I add one question: Where is your child in this pattern? Are they the messenger? Are they going quiet at exchanges? Are they telling each parent what that parent wants to hear? Remember what the research says about home. Children often hold back to keep the peace. So a child who doesn't seem to mind may simply be a child who has learned it isn't safe to mind. The pause gives a parent room to notice that. Okay. A. Attend to what matters. This is where we separate the position from the interest. What is the parent demanding and what do they actually need? Now add the child's interest to the list. Not the parents guess about what the child wants and not would win the argument. What does this child's daily life actually require? Friends, school, activities, time with both parents, a predictable routine. The review showed us how differently adults and children frame the same decision. Parents talk about schedules. Children talk about their lives. Part of our job is to help the parent hear the second conversation. Okay, R. Reconsider perspectives. Usually we use this step to help a parent understand the other parent well enough to stop being blindsided. With the child in focus, there's a third perspective in the room. I'll ask a parent, if your son could describe the last month, what would he say? Or what do you think your daughter wishes you both knew about what she won't say? This is all where we gently test gatekeeping. Is this parent deciding the child is too young, too fragile, or too influenced to have a view? Sometimes that's true. Sometimes it's protection, and sometimes it's a way of keeping the child's perspective out because it's inconvenient. The review challenges professionals to look at those assumptions. We can invite parents to do the same. E, explore choices. Parents stuck in conflict usually see two options. Here it's often keep the kids out or let them decide. Our job is to widen that field. What are the in-between options? Using the research, we can think in those three layers, right? Information. What can this child be told in age-appropriate words about what's changing and how decisions get made? Expression. Where can the child safely share their view? A regular check-in with a parent, a therapist, a child-inclusive mediation process. What's appropriate and available? And then influence. What will the child know their view was considered? How will they know that? Even when the answer is no, can someone explain why? And notice the order I suggest. Start at home. Most of the time, a parent who has done the work in coaching can handle all three layers in ordinary conversations with their child pretty naturally. A formal setting is the exception you choose for a reason, not the place you start. And the guardrail stays in place every single time. Adults decide. We are never, ever, ever working with a parent to hand child the decision or to ask, who do you want to live with? Okay, so now let's go back to our parent and navigate the next interaction. This is where insight turns into behavior. What's the specific conversation coming up? It might be the conversation with the child. We can help a parent prepare how they'll open it, what they'll say if the child brings up the other parent, and how they'll avoid reacting in a way that teaches the child to stop sharing. Or it might be the conversation with the attorney or the mediator. We can help the parent describe what they've learned about their child's needs in a way that is calm, specific, and child focused rather than my kid hates going there. That's how a child's perspective enters the process as information instead of ammunition. And lastly, the T: Try, track, and adjust. The review makes a point I think gets missed. Participation should be ongoing. Children grow. What works for a six-year-old will not work for a 12-year-old. So the parent tries something. Maybe a weekly check-in or a new way of explaining a decision. Then they notice what happens. Is the child more relaxed at transitions? Saying more, saying less? Then they adjust. And this connects back to the parenting plan. A plan that has a built-in review point as children reach new stages gives everyone a structured way to revisit the child's needs instead of fighting about them. Let me give you a composite example, right? Built from patterns I've seen many times. So no real family here. A mother comes into divorce coaching. Her 11-year-old son has started refusing to pack for his weekends at dad's. She's frustrated and honestly a little relieved because she's been unhappy with how things go at that house. Her plan is to tell the mediator that her son doesn't want to go anymore. So we pause. When does the refusing happen? Mostly Thursday nights. Okay, well, what else is on Thursdays? It turns out the dad's weekend now starts Friday after school, and her son has a travel soccer game most Saturdays that his dad can't get him to. So we attend to what matters. Mom's interest is that her son is okay. Her son's interest, it turns out, isn't avoiding his father at all. It's not missing his games and not letting his team down. So we reconsider. I ask what her son might say if he weren't worried about upsetting anyone. She thinks for a minute and says, well, he'd probably say he misses his dad, but hates being the reason everybody gets mad at him on the team. We explore choices. Instead of he doesn't want to go, what options exist? A shift in the exchange time, dad driving to the game, a swap on tournament weekends. We navigate. She practices how she's going to talk with her son. She'll tell him she noticed Thursdays are hard, ask what's going on, and tell him the grown ups will work out the soccer piece. Then she prepares a calm, specific proposal for mediation built around the soccer schedule. And she tries, tracks, and adjusts. Three weeks later, the Thursday refusals have mostly stopped. Notice what happened? The child was informed. He was able to express himself. His view influenced the outcome. And he never had to choose between his parents. That's the difference between consulting a child and actually hearing one. You may have noticed something about that example. The father never came in to our coaching session. The whole shift started with just one parent. That's why I believe individual work comes first. So much co-parenting help assumes both parents will show up, take the class, meet halfway, and many don't. And the children in those families can't wait for both parents to be ready. When we are able to work one-on-one, the parent can be honest about their fear, their anger, and their blind spots without performing for the other parent. That is where a parent can actually hear their child. And it's how they walk into mediation or negotiation prepared. Instead of reactive. It's also where a parent learns to have those kitchen table conversations well. We can rehearse them, talk through what came up, and catch the moments when listening starts to slide into case building. That's work you simply can't do with both parents in the room, competing for their interests or the child's loyalty. This is exactly what we teach in our course: coaching parents through conflict. And this is the final week to register. So if you're not familiar with the course, it's a six-week live course that starts next Monday, November 9th, and runs every Monday through December 14th from 1 to 2:30 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. You'll work through case examples and practice exercises using that parent framework. You'll learn how to spot escalation patterns, help parents move from positions to child-centered decisions. And prepare them for conversations with their attorneys and mediators as necessary. It is built for ADR divorce coaches, mediators, parenting coordinators, and family law professionals, and it offers 15 continuing ed units. You can register through Divorce Coaches Academy. The link is going to be in the show notes, and classes start next week, so you don't want to wait. I want to leave you with this thought. Children aren't asking us to let them run the show. They're asking us to know what's happening, to be asked, and to see that what they said mattered. That is a reasonable request. And when we help a parent honor it, we usually reduce conflict because the conversation shifts from who's right to what does our child need. And please remember: the most powerful place for a child's voice. is usually the simplest one. Not a hearing room, not an interview. A parent who asks, listens without an agenda, and follows through. When we help parents get there, we keep children out of the middle and out of the processes they were never intended to enter. I want to thank you so much for listening and joining us at Divorce Coaches Academy podcast. I hope to see you in class on Monday and next time at our weekly conversations.