Don’t make children decide where they live
When parents separate, they are understandably very concerned about their child’s well-being. Conversations about the child’s “best interests” start becoming common. One of the most difficult questions to navigate is: “What does the child want?”
A child may say, “I want to live with Dad,” or “I want to stay at Mom’s house more,” or even, “I don't want to go to the other parent's house anymore.”
It is understandable, and appropriate, that parents want to listen to their children. Children deserve to have their feelings, concerns, and preferences taken seriously.
But there is an important distinction between listening to a child and asking a child to make the decision.
Children should have a voice in matters that affect them. They should not, however, be placed in the position of choosing between their parents or deciding which household they will live in. Where a child lives, and determining a child’s timesharing schedule, should be an adult responsibility rather a child’s burden. As I often say to parents: “Children should have a voice, not a vote.”
A child’s preference is not necessarily the same thing as what is best for the child
One of the most common misconceptions in divorce is that whatever a child wants must be what is best for the child.
Children are capable of expressing very strong and very genuine preferences. But children make decisions based on their developmental level, their experiences, their emotions, and what feels good or comfortable in the moment.
Adults do this differently because they have the capacity to consider longer-term consequences, competing needs, safety, developmental needs, and the interests of everyone involved.
A child may prefer the house with fewer rules, later bedtimes, more screen time, or fewer expectations. A child may prefer the parent who lives closer to friends. A child may want to avoid a household where they are expected to complete homework, follow a schedule, or contribute to household responsibilities.
Those preferences are real.
But real feelings do not automatically equal sound decisions.
We don't expect children to make every important decision simply because the decision directly affects them. We allow children increasing autonomy as they mature, while parents remain responsible for decisions that require adult judgment.
We don't let children decide everything else
Consider the decisions parents make every day.
We don't generally ask a child:
“Would you like to go to school today?”
“Which school should you attend?”
“Do you want to go to your doctor's appointment?”
“Would you like to get that vaccination?”
“Should you take your medication?”
“Do you want to go to bed tonight?”
“Would you rather live with your aunt for a while?”
Children may have opinions about all of these things. Their opinions may even be extremely important.
But having an opinion is different from having decision-making authority.
If a child says, “I don't want to go to the doctor,” we don't conclude that the child should therefore be allowed to cancel the appointment.
If a child says, “I hate school,” we don't conclude that the child should be permitted to stop attending.
And if a child says, “I want to live with Aunt Sarah instead,” we don't ordinarily treat that statement as sufficient reason for the child to move out of the family home.
Divorce should not suddenly transform a developmental responsibility into a child's decision simply because there are now two households.
If the parents were a unit, the child wouldn't get to choose a different home
This is an important thought experiment.
Imagine the parents had never separated.
Could the child decide, “I don't want to live with Mom and Dad anymore. I want to live with Aunt Sarah”?
Could the child decide that they would spend Monday through Thursday with Grandma because Grandma's house is more fun?
Could the child announce that they preferred one side of the family and therefore would no longer participate with the other?
In most households, the answer would be no.
The parents would listen. They would ask why the child felt that way. They would investigate whether there was a problem that needed attention. They would make appropriate changes if necessary.
But the child would not become the decision-maker simply because they expressed a preference.
Having separated or divorced parents should not place a child in a fundamentally different position simply because the child now has two homes.
Asking a child to choose can create a loyalty bind
Perhaps the greatest problem with allowing children to choose their parenting schedule is that it can place them directly in the middle of their parents' conflict.
A child may love both parents but still prefer one household at a particular moment.
When adults ask, “Who do you want to live with?” the child may hear something very different:
“Which parent do you choose?”
That is an extraordinarily difficult question for a child.
Children often recognize that their answer may hurt one parent. They may worry about disappointing Mom if they choose Dad, or disappointing Dad if they choose Mom. They may feel responsible for their parents' feelings. They may even modify their answer based on what they believe each parent wants to hear.
This is a loyalty bind.
The child is no longer simply navigating two households. The child is navigating the emotional consequences of choosing one parent over the other.
That is a burden children should not have to carry.
Children deserve permission and encouragement to love both parents
After separation or divorce, children need a clear message:
“You don't have to choose.”
You can love Mom.
You can love Dad.
You can enjoy Mom's family.
You can enjoy Dad's family.
You can miss the parent you're not currently with.
And you can be happy to return to that parent without feeling disloyal to the parent you are currently with.
A predictable parenting schedule can communicate this message far more effectively than asking a child to choose.
Consistency matters
Children generally benefit from knowing what to expect.
They need to know where they will sleep, when they will see each parent, when they will go to school, when they will participate in activities, and when they will spend time with extended family.
A predictable schedule provides a sense of structure and security.
Allowing a child to continually determine where they will be can create an entirely different dynamic: the child's preference becomes the mechanism by which the parenting schedule changes.
That can make transitions more difficult rather than easier.
It can also inadvertently teach a child that discomfort in one household is solved by escaping to the other household.
Children need to learn how to function in both households
Two homes are going to be different.
Mom may have different rules than Dad.
The households may have different routines, personalities, traditions, expectations, and extended-family relationships.
That is not necessarily a problem.
In fact, learning to function successfully in different environments is an important developmental skill.
Children need opportunities to develop relationships with each parent and with the people who are important to each parent.
That includes grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, stepparents, and other members of the child's extended family.
If a child learns that they can simply avoid one household whenever it becomes uncomfortable, difficult, boring, or frustrating, they may never develop the skills necessary to navigate differences between the two homes.
The goal should not be to create two competing households in which the child chooses whichever environment they prefer.
The goal should be to help the child develop a healthy relationship with both.
There should not always be an “escape”
Every household has moments that children don't like.
There are rules they don't like.
There are chores they don't like.
There are relatives they may find annoying.
There are conversations they don't want to have.
There are expectations that feel difficult.
There are times when children would simply rather be somewhere else.
That is part of growing up.
If the child always has the option to say, “I don't want to be here; I'm going to the other parent's house,” the child may never learn an important life skill: how to tolerate ordinary discomfort and work through problems in relationships.
Of course, this does not mean children should be forced to remain in an environment that is unsafe, abusive, or otherwise inappropriate. Genuine safety concerns must always be taken seriously and investigated by adults.
But ordinary disagreement, frustration, different parenting styles, or a child's temporary preference for the other household should not automatically become a reason to abandon the parenting schedule.
The long-term goal is the adult-child relationship
There is another reason this matters that is often overlooked.
The parenting schedule isn't just about getting through the next week, month, or school year.
It is helping establish the foundation for the child's relationship with each parent for decades to come.
Children eventually become adults.
The goal is not simply to get a child through childhood with the fewest possible complaints. The goal is to help them develop secure, enduring relationships with both parents.
That means children need repeated opportunities to experience each parent as a parent—not simply as the parent they visit when they choose to.
They need ordinary experiences together:
school mornings;
homework;
meals;
chores;
family traditions;
holidays;
celebrations;
disappointments;
difficult conversations;
boring afternoons;
laughter;
comfort;
problem-solving;
and simply being together.
Those ordinary experiences are what relationships are built upon.
If a child is permitted to substantially reduce or eliminate time with one parent whenever the child prefers the other household, the child may lose many of those opportunities.
And the consequences may not become apparent until years later.
“But shouldn't we listen to what the child wants?”
Yes.
Absolutely.
Listen to the child.
But listening is not the same as handing over the decision.
If a child says, “I don't want to go to Dad's house,” the appropriate response is not necessarily, “Okay, you don't have to.”
The appropriate response may be:
“Tell me what is making you feel that way.”
Then the adults can determine what is actually happening.
Is the child struggling with transitions?
Is there conflict between the parents?
Is there a problem in one household?
Is the child experiencing normal resistance to change?
Is someone influencing the child's preference?
Is the child trying to protect one parent?
Is there a genuine safety concern?
Or is the child simply expressing a preference for the household that currently feels easier?
The child's statement is information. It is not automatically a parenting plan.
“But I don’t want to force them.”
“Force” is different from “expect.” Ideally, we don’t “force” children to go to school, brush their teeth, eat their vegetables, or do any of the other requirements that parents have for children. Instead, we give them a voice by hearing and discussing their thoughts and feelings, and then setting them up for success by helping them create a plan to overcome any concerns they have.
Children need parents to be the adults
Divorce already asks children to adapt to an enormous change in their family structure.
They should not also have to become responsible for deciding how that family should function.
Parents can give children choices that are appropriate for their age: what clothes to wear, what activity to participate in, which book to read, or what they would like for dinner.
But some decisions belong to adults.
Where a child lives, how much time they spend with each parent, and how their relationship with both sides of their family is maintained are among those decisions.
A child should be able to say:
“I don't want to go to Mom’s tonight.”
And receive empathy and a listening ear in response. At the end of that conversation, though, the parent can respond:
“I understand. Sometimes transitions are hard. Mom is your parent, and you're going to have your time with her. I'll see you when you come back.”
That response communicates something incredibly important:
You don't have to choose. The adults will take care of the adults' decisions. Your job is to be a child.
A healthy parenting plan is not necessarily the one that gives children the greatest amount of choice.
It is the one that gives children the greatest opportunity to have healthy, secure, and lasting relationships with both parents while providing the structure and stability they need to grow.
Children deserve a voice.
They deserve to be heard.
They deserve to have their concerns taken seriously.
But they should not be asked to choose between the people they love.
That decision belongs to the adults.
Exception: Unsafe Situations
There is an important exception to everything discussed above: a child's objection to spending time with a parent should never be dismissed simply because children should not choose their own schedules.
If a child reports abuse, neglect, intimidation, inappropriate sexual behavior, violence, substance abuse, or another genuine safety concern, adults have an obligation to take that concern seriously.
Likewise, significant changes in a child's behavior, emotional functioning, or physical symptoms associated with time in a particular household may warrant further evaluation, perhaps by a child-focused mental health provider.
The answer, however, should not automatically be to tell the child, “You don't have to go.”
Instead, the adults should investigate what is happening and determine what intervention is appropriate. Depending on the circumstances, an intervention may involve a mental health professional, pediatrician, child protection agency, attorney, guardian ad litem, or the court.
There is an important difference between:
“I don't want to go to Mom’s because she makes me do homework and I want to stay here and play with my friends.”
and
“I don't want to go to Mom’s because something happens there that makes me feel unsafe.”
Those situations require very different responses.
Children should never be expected to endure abuse or unsafe conditions in the name of maintaining a parenting schedule. At the same time, parents should be cautious about interpreting every expression of resistance as evidence that a child should have the authority to change or terminate the parenting schedule.
The child's words are important information.
They are the beginning of a discussion—not necessarily the end of the decision-making process.
The responsibility for determining what is happening and what is in the child's best interests belongs with the adults.
Final thoughts …
Children deserve a voice. They deserve to be heard. They deserve empathy and time to express their thoughts. They deserve to have their concerns taken seriously.
But they should not be asked to choose between the people they love.
That decision belongs to the adults.
Need help navigating parenting style clashes? Co-parent coaching offers tools to reduce conflict and build a functional partnership. Reach out today for more information.
