Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Bird nesting is becoming a popular post-divorce child custody arrangement in which the divorced parents, rather than the children, move in and out of the marital residence. In most cases, bird nesting is either inappropriate or unnecessary. First, the disadvantages of bird nesting outweigh the advantages. Second, the most recent social science research shows that children are not as negatively affected by divorce. This is supported by three arguments: (1) compared to children of intact families, the long-term development of divorced children is comparatively normal; (2) children are not as negatively affected by post-divorce variables; and (3) children are not as affected by residential insecurity as previously thought. Third, joint custody is sufficient in promoting positive developmental adjustment in children, such that there is little to be gained by bird nesting over a joint custody arrangement.
Many parents and courts believe that bird nesting is a conduit for developmental adjustment in the primary problem area for children of divorce--instability. Consequently, they are employing bird nesting in cases for which it is inherently unsuitable. Bird nesting is a limited response to the isolated crisis of divorce that does not account for multiple risk variables. Therefore, although it has its limited advantages, bird nesting is counter-productive to the best interests of children of divorce. The article concludes that bird nesting should be employed in very limited circumstances, under close judicial supervision, and only upon the agreement of both parents.