Plural • Solution #23 for Protection from femicide must not fail for lack of money or time.
Solution #23
Define shared parenting as the standard in post-separation situations, given that this model has been scientifically proven to correlate directly with a reduction in domestic violence and thus addresses a key root cause.
Convinced? Rate this contribution from the community — and help make the best ideas visible.
3 comments
Join the discussion: ask questions, challenge ideas, and add context so the post becomes clearer.
1000 characters remaining
O. H.Moderation
2 months ago
Danke für Vorschlag und Quelle. Wir haben Studie und Rechtslage geprüft.
Die Studie ist gut gemacht. Sie untersucht spanische Reformen ab 2010. Vorher galt dort die alleinige Obhut als Regel, gegen den Willen der Mutter war eine geteilte Obhut kaum durchsetzbar. Das änderte sich, danach ging die Partnergewalt zurück.
Diesen Schritt hat die Schweiz aber längst gemacht. Seit 2014 ist die gemeinsame elterliche Sorge die Regel, auch ohne Einigung der Eltern. Seit 2017 muss das Gericht die alternierende Obhut prüfen, wenn ein Elternteil oder das Kind es verlangt. Ein Veto der Mutter gibt es hier nicht.
Was die Studie misst, ist bei uns bereits Gesetz. Und gemessen wurde Partnergewalt, nicht Femizide.
Dürfen wir den Vorschlag auf eine die Schweizer Lücke anpassen?
Neu: «Die alternierende Obhut wird nach einer Trennung von Amtes wegen geprüft und nicht erst auf Antrag, ausser es liegt dokumentierte Gewalt vor.»
0
R. R.Author
2 months ago
Probably a more sensible proposal would be something like: “If one parent makes alternating custody impossible due to self‑created distance, custody is by default assigned to the other parent, provided they are willing.” This would greatly reduce abuse and thus also the tensions between parents. In some places this already happens. For example, California has such a law where custody is practically lost automatically if you deprive the children, and other countries weigh this much more heavily than, say, Switzerland.
The question is whether this wouldn’t fundamentally be a separate issue in itself, if these also interrelate… Ultimately, violence is always based on some foundation. I personally find it smarter to first try to fight the causes rather than the consequences, because usually it always requires a combination of both.
0
R. R.Author
2 months ago
In theory, that would be the case, yes. In practice, it is only partially or not at all implemented. I have received confirmation of this from several politicians and also from lawyers. If a parent wants to sabotage alternating custody (e.g., by taking the child and moving away), the courts simply conclude that we can no longer provide alternating custody because the distance is too great. And the evaluation is finished. If you want to look at a concrete case, there is a blog about it: Kinderschutz Aargau
The law and reality diverge dramatically; for example, ZGB Art. 301a is not implemented at all, and there are no consequences for a violation.
The only thing is that the femicide rate and partner violence are obviously not the same, and I agree with that. I don't have the study memorized 100%, but if I remember correctly, the femicide rate has also decreased, although not to the same extent.