When Co-parenting Overshadows the Child

Co-parenting has long been considered the gold standard following separation and divorce—and for good reason. When parents are able to communicate respectfully, make joint decisions, and keep children out of conflict, research consistently shows better outcomes for children.

It is a well-established principle that is difficult to dispute.

But what happens when that gold standard isn't attainable?

For many separated families, collaborative co-parenting is both realistic and beneficial. Yet there remains a significant minority of families—particularly those navigating domestic abuse, coercive control, post-separation abuse, or coercive parenting—for whom the traditional co-parenting model is simply not a safe or appropriate option.

And while I've seen encouraging progress in the recognition that co-parenting is not always appropriate, I still struggle to see professionals giving parents permission to stop pursuing it when it comes at the expense of their own wellbeing or their children's.

The problem isn't co-parenting itself.

The problem is what happens when we become so committed to achieving co-parenting that we stop asking whether it is actually the intervention that best serves this particular child.

When co-parenting becomes the goal, we risk losing sight of the uniqueness of each family system and the unique developmental needs of the child within it.

For many professionals, the decision-making process has quietly become:

Divorce ➝ Co-parenting ➝ Best outcomes for children.

But what if the better framework is something entirely different?

Rather than asking:

"Can these parents co-parent?"

What if we first asked:

"What does this child need in order to experience safe attachment relationships and healthy development?"

Those are not the same question.

And they may lead us to very different answers.

A Different Decision-Making Framework

The challenge isn't that co-parenting is a poor model.

The challenge is allowing one parenting model to become the measure of success for every family, rather than asking which approach best supports the developmental needs of the child sitting in front of us.

Children do not all grow up within the same family system.

Some grow up with parents who are able to communicate respectfully and make joint decisions.

Others grow up in families shaped by chronic conflict, coercive control, domestic abuse, post-separation abuse, or ongoing psychological harm.

Expecting both groups to fit into the same parenting model may unintentionally overlook the very complexities that require our attention most.

Instead of asking how we can move every family toward co-parenting, perhaps we should be asking which parenting structure best protects this particular child's long-term wellbeing.

If Not Co-parenting, Then What?

If healthy co-parenting is not a viable option because it cannot be achieved without compromising the emotional or psychological safety of members of the family system, then what becomes the priority?

From an attachment perspective, the answer is surprisingly clear.

The priority shifts from strengthening the relationship between the parents to protecting the child's attachment relationships with each parent.

Research from the National Scientific Council on the Developing Child consistently highlights that the single greatest protective factor in a child's life is at least one stable, supportive relationship with a caring adult. It is these relationships that buffer children from adversity and promote resilience over time.

Which brings us to what I believe is one of the most important distinctions we can make.

Children are not attached to the co-parenting relationship.

They are attached to people.

They are attached to the parent who comforts them after a nightmare.

The parent who delights in them.

The parent who notices when something doesn't feel right.

The parent who helps regulate overwhelming emotions.

The parent who creates safety, predictability, connection, and belonging.

Those are attachment relationships.

Those are the relationships that shape development.

A healthy co-parenting relationship can absolutely provide the optimal environment in which those attachment relationships flourish.

But these are related systems—not interchangeable ones.

It is entirely possible for a child to experience secure attachment with a parent, even when the parents themselves do not have a functional co-parenting relationship.

Of course, the ideal is to have both.

But when that is not possible, preserving the child's attachment relationships may become the more important priority.

The Cost We Rarely Consider

It is also important to acknowledge what we are asking of parents when we continue to hold co-parenting as the gold standard in every case.

In situations involving coercive control or post-separation abuse, encouraging increased communication may unintentionally reduce the protective parent's capacity to provide the emotional availability that supports secure attachment.

When interactions with the other parent repeatedly activate fear, hypervigilance, or dysregulation, that parent's nervous system is required to devote energy toward protection rather than connection.

Trauma research also suggests that healing is significantly more difficult while an individual remains exposed to the conditions that created the threat in the first place.

If our intervention requires ongoing exposure to those conditions, we should at least ask whether the potential benefits outweigh the developmental costs.

Because those costs are not borne by parents alone.

They are often borne by children as well.

Which brings us to an uncomfortable, but necessary, question.

What cost are we asking parents and children to pay in pursuit of a parenting model that may never be achievable for their family?

And is that cost worth it?

Perhaps We've Been Asking the Wrong Question

For many families, healthy co-parenting will continue to be the answer.

It should remain something we support whenever it can be achieved safely and genuinely.

But for others—particularly families navigating domestic abuse, coercive control, or post-separation abuse—the answer may look very different.

If our goal is truly to serve children's best interests, then perhaps success should no longer be measured by the amount of communication occurring between parents.

Perhaps it should be measured by something far more meaningful.

Are children's attachment relationships being protected?

Are they experiencing emotional safety?

Are the adults around them supporting healthy development?

Because perhaps the better question has never been:

"Can these parents co-parent?"

Perhaps it has always been:

"What arrangement gives this child the greatest opportunity to experience safe, secure attachment relationships while protecting every member of the family system from further harm?"

The answer will not be the same for every family.

Nor should it be.

Because children are not attached to co-parenting.

They are attached to people.

Further Reading:

Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment (2nd ed.). Basic Books. (Original work published 1969)

National Scientific Council on the Developing Child (2015). Supportive Relationships and Active Skill-Building Strengthen the Foundations of Resilience: Working Paper No. 13. Retrieved from www.developingchild.harvard.edu.

Xyrakis, N. et al, 2023. “Interparental Coercive Control and Child and Family Outcomes: A Systematic Review.” First published online December 2022. https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380221139243