The question of divorce and its effect on children's behavior in the social environment Until recently, divorce was an exceptional experience for most of society. However, today, when divorces are a common phenomenon, society does not judge them as negatively as it once did. Couples now divorce for various reasons, sometimes even seemingly absurd ones. Probably the people most affected by this reality are precisely their offspring, their children. Parents rarely realize how they behave, how their child perceives it, and what consequences it may leave on their lives. It is not unusual that, in these situations full of conflict, insults, and arguments, parents defend their own interests. The child therefore finds himself or herself in various situations in which parents try to win over (or even buy) the child on their side, that is, manipulate them. Such behavior negatively affects the child’s inner experience. During divorce, parents are usually less sensitive to children’s needs. They are dealing with acute problems in their relationship, and no strength remains for anything else.

The phenomenon of marriage, matrimonium in Latin, is translated as marriage. This term consists of two words: mater (mother) and munia or munus (duty, mission). Marriage has a triple dimension: • legal dimension: it is a contract between a man and a woman, • natural dimension: spouses who form a community are primarily oriented to the good of the marriage itself: the good of the spouses, procreation, and upbringing of children, • social dimension: this community is built on the human nature of living in a social group, • cultural, religious dimension: traditional marriage is understood as the relationship of one man and one woman (equivalence in Catholic, evangelical, Orthodox, and Jewish religion; non-equivalence, i.e., so-called caste-like forms: Buddhism, Shinto, Hinduism, Confucianism).

In Slovak family law, marriage is established as a stable community of a man and a woman, whose main purpose is the creation of a family and the upbringing of children. This legally based community rests on the principles of voluntariness and equal rights. In the Slovak legal system, therefore, we know two forms of entering marriage: • church form or • civil form (also known as civil ceremony).

Marriage is the bond of one man and one woman concluded in a way provided for or recognized by the Slovak Republic. It is not possible to establish another bond in this way. The special protection granted by law to marriage cannot be granted to any other relationship, except marriage. Marriage is often defined as an institution that secures certain roles and functions in society. In this sense, marriage regulates relations between two people, primarily property and legal relations. In the framework of property and legal relations, however, there is the issue that the current trend toward legal partnership recognition resolves property and legal ties, while not addressing issues of procreation and child-rearing (which we may see as an attempt at equalization with the classical family), but often focuses mainly on property rather than family. Marriage before civil authorities can be entered into by unmarried fiancés, widowed, divorced persons (this point is not permitted before ecclesiastical authorities), as well as minors (16–18 years old) after presenting a final court decision permitting marriage. Marriage presupposes a family. Family is characterized by the arrival of a child, by biological or adoptive means. If a child is absent, one cannot speak of a family. If a parent is absent, one can speak of an incomplete family. According to Christian traditions, families are founded only in marriages. In the secular world, family is not claimed as a legal marriage relationship, which is why cohabitation appears more and more often in Slovakia, along with the older term concubine (“concubine” meaning concubine/partner), or what is colloquially called “living in the wild.” It is often from these relationships that so-called “single, mingle, or patchwork families” arise (Tománek, 2012a, p. 44), not excluding same-sex families without a legal framework. Marriage is a relationship between two people of opposite sex, which enjoys state, social, or ecclesiastical recognition. We place marriage and family among the basic institutions of social life. Family has always been the first and fundamental expression of human social nature. Marriage is a unique relationship. It is a socially recognized and formally contracted union between one man and one woman. In contemporary times, it is not attributed the importance it once held. Today’s young people do not see marriage as a guaranteed path to happiness, and therefore do not feel the need to “seal” their partnership. “Marriage, parenthood, and family are under the protection of law” (Article 41(1) of Act No. 460/1992 Coll., Constitution of the Slovak Republic as amended). Marriage is thus protected as a social institution with tasks that secure basic social functions necessary for the functioning of the state. “Marriage is a relationship that is not static; it develops constantly and is subject to continual change” (Tuma, 2013a). And precisely for this reason, to be of quality and fulfill its purpose, spouses should continuously cultivate and develop their relationship. From such a marital relationship, a family suitable for child rearing can arise. Marriage passes through several important stages from its beginning. These are (Tománek, 2012b, pp. 79–81): 1. The marital and family period of the first 18 months: spouses get to know each other, share interests, and become aware of each other’s whereabouts. They are sensitive to one another and mutually observe how they behave toward their social surroundings, especially to the opposite sex. They begin to understand the relationships around family members. Often, the first pregnancy occurs, as do first spontaneous abortions and the resolution of first conflicts. If housing is not yet solved, spouses begin to think intensely about it. Foundations of mutual trust are created. With the coming child come other concerns and joys. The husband must care not only for his pregnant wife but must realize that the world will now revolve not around him but around the child. The wife must not forget to divide her attention equally between her child and her husband. 2. The marital and family period up to three years: in most marriages, the first, if not the second, child is born. The family is stable, spouses understand each other. They are careful about their child and watch closely what others say about their child. With the arrival of a second child, sensitivity decreases. What was overlooked with the first child will certainly be overlooked with the next. Not that the younger child receives less love or care, but parents are more experienced and mature and do not overreact to every stumble of their offspring. If they lived with their parents before, in most cases they consider moving to their own home. Parents lay the first foundations of ethics. Early information about religious orientation is also part of this stage. 3. The marital and family period up to six years: the first crises arrive, and in some cases infidelity. Responsibilities on both parents increase. Children begin to grow and branch out. Family relationships with the wider family either strengthen or deteriorate. On the other hand, this is the most beautiful period for parents, because they see the child grow from early age, experience their first falls, first words, first questions, and even crushes in kindergarten. In families, disputes often arise between siblings about who owns what and so on. Housing is often already solved. Spouses most often repay mortgage loans. They develop their personalities and meet people with similar life goals. 4. The marital and family period up to 12 years: spouses have passed their first crises. Their relationship is more stable. A renewed mutual infatuation appears. The possibility of having another child arises. Parents know all school obligations of their children. This is a period of personality growth not only for children but also for the marriage. Parents begin to meet in school with classmates, and with parents there too, exchanging experiences and life events. They are relatively happy and considerate toward one another. Spouses now know each other’s boundaries. 5. The marital and family period up to 25 years: marriage is relatively stable. Parents often face pubescent issues, first serious infatuations, sexual and spiritual orientation of their children. Spouses discover the charm of their years and build their careers. In this period, another child is rarely born. Spouses attend various gatherings and enjoy themselves knowing that relatives care for their children. By the end of this period, couples usually repay the housing mortgage. 6. The marital period up to 50 years: this is a time of major turbulence. Infidelity, alcoholism, job loss, and feelings of inferiority often occur. Parents prepare their children for their future life. When a child leaves home, they experience the empty-nest syndrome. If one spouse dies, the other often loses the spark of life. This is the period of their children’s weddings, successful completion of studies, and first grandchildren. It is a period of vacations and rest. Parents pass life wisdom to their children. It is a period of beautiful remembering. It is an era of wisdom, composure, optimism, and critical thinking, all signs of a fully developed and emotionally mature personality.

Today, marriages are also entered into by people of the same sex—so-called registered partnerships. However, marriage cannot be equated with partnership, and especially not with same-sex partnership. If marriage is once defined as a relationship between one man and one woman, everything else would diminish this definition, trivialize it, and over time this term would lose its distinctiveness and meaning. Entering marriage is a free, voluntary, and at the same time binding decision of two persons of opposite sex to cohabit, based on a legal relationship built on equality. In the marital vow, among other things, man and woman publicly declare that they will never abandon each other. For many, this is precisely the motivating force for handling future problems and crises.

2 The premise of family is marriage

“Family is a social group” (Tománek, 2012b, pp. 11–12), composed of two or more people living together in one household who are connected by marital, blood, or adoptive ties. It can also be characterized as the primary, informal, intimate social group and the basic social unit (Tamášová, 2007, p. 12), often “considered the cradle of humanity and upbringing.” Family (Prevendárová, 1998, p. 11) is also characterized as a small social group, founded by two adult members of opposite sex and their descendants. It is the first social environment and educational institution of highest significance, into which an individual enters. Family is a socially approved form of partnerships between two equal, mutually respectful people who are in love, linked by close kinship and blood ties. Its hallmark is intimate cohabitation in one household, cooperation, help, and cooperation among its members. The atmosphere of the family environment is determined by relationships between parents and other family members. “A child is formed by family relationships, by the family environment in which they grow up. What a child sees in the family, that they imitate” (Kostrub, 2007, p. 15). Adults, especially parents, are a model for the child in every behavior. Family is a natural social group, the basic cell of society. It gathers people into intimate unity on the basis of blood ties. Everywhere a man and a woman live together under one roof, manage a household together, and raise children, we speak of family. It is there that the child creates their own identity and a typical culture expressed through traditions, values, and conventions. Blood kinship, family economic interests, and child-rearing, however, do not fully capture the essence of family. Family is not able to exist in isolation from society; it is always part of a wider social unit whose norms, culture, traditions, and outlooks also shape family life. “Family is therefore the first link in the chain connecting the individual with society. Family is the first testing environment” (Tamášová, 2007, p. 37).

We also offer another typology of family developmental stages (Tománek, 2012b, p. 12): 1. young family: up to 30 years, children, and 5-year marriage, 2. middle-aged family (Tamášová, 2007, p. 55): parents, adolescent children, marriage lasting 15–25 years, 3. empty nest: spouses remain together, children have left home, 4. visiting family: widowhood after the death of a partner.

Family should be the place where a person feels good and safe. Where one likes to return, and where there are conditions for one’s growth and development of abilities. On the other hand, not everyone is fortunate enough to be born and raised in a functional family (Tuma, Dolista, 2010). In that case, even one’s own family can be destructive and leave negative consequences for those raised there. Family is a significant and specific agent of socialization, giving the child first and very strong experiences for later life. It shows the child how to behave toward one another, how to cooperate and help, how to react when things do not work out. The child observes the opinions, attitudes, and values of mother and father and thus learns what is expected of a man and what of a woman. Family is the primary model of social interaction and communication in a small social group. It integrates the child into a certain way of life, teaching social demands and norms. Family and its emotional base are irreplaceable for child development.

3 Crisis periods in marriage

“Crisis situations in marriage and partnership are undoubtedly among the most frequent and also among the most intensely experienced crisis events overall. They affect people mostly unprepared and without prior warning signals. WHO, the World Health Organization, classifies partnership breakdowns, divorces, and crises among the most prominent stressful life events” (Vodáčková, 2010, p. 286). A crisis is generally described as a reaction to a situation the individual cannot resolve in the usual way. In crisis and family breakdown, we see many factors. Family crisis is connected to the present age. Among the core factors that trigger a crisis in modern families, we include: the significant decline in natality and reduction of family structure (max. 2 children); incomplete families, often arising through divorce; the issue of concubinage or cohabitation: especially frequent separations, re-dating, unforgiveness, and disillusionment with the relationship; the phenomenon of registered same-sex partnerships: the suicide issue of people who feel they are gay and of those whose same-sex children are a source of shame (parents, wider family, etc.); lack of financial resources; impotence; deprivation; the atomization of families and the subsequent emergence of so-called single families, mingle families, patchwork families; entropy and the dissolution of family; workaholism; deviations, gambling, and other pathological phenomena; abortion tendency: especially mothers who could not bear the reality that their child had been taken away; the breakdown of traditional communities: especially questions of multiculturalism and multireligiosity.

The phenomenon of “crisis” is often defined from several perspectives. It already appears in ancient cultures. Human beings have always been confronted with reality—facts that were critical for them. M. Planck (in Klimpl, 1991, p. 72) says that “a crisis is a rapidly escalating situation in which the person affected is no longer able to overcome and handle external or internal strain through their own strategies.” But the phenomenon of crisis means much more. A crisis consists of affective and conflict-ridden intensified experiencing and behavior of a person in high-pressure life situations. A crisis often marks a turning point in personal, professional, and family life and cohabitation. If we do not address crises, they begin to resolve the cause—i.e., the person. For this problem to be considered rationally, crisis must meet two conditions (Eis, 1994): • dysfunction: family atomization, dysfunctional marriages, the emergence of alternative forms of family cohabitation (single, mingle, patchwork families...), same-sex families, etc. • lack of perspective: loss or absence of any vision of the future...

Every human being is governed by certain regulatory mechanisms (biological, psychological, or social). If these mechanisms are disrupted, a person enters external or internal conflicts that can trigger a crisis. Many authors equate crisis with catastrophe. However, this is not correct. Catastrophe, unlike crisis, is a far more transparent, visible, and obvious situation (e.g., natural disasters, poor school performance, career and professional failure, etc.). However, catastrophe can prepare for a crisis, and crisis can in turn cause catastrophe. Catastrophe affects all core regulatory mechanisms (biological, psychological, and social) and weakens all basic levels of human activity. A crisis, because of the universal scope of its impact (the complexity of influence), is therefore often the source of many problems in the contemporary family.

The most common crises in marriage include (Novák, 2000): different opinions on spending free time (spending time together, with children, etc.); lack of shared interests due to performance orientation; different views on rights and duties in the household; infidelity or extramarital affairs; dissatisfaction in intimate life; infertility; jealousy; addictions (alcohol, smoking, gambling, sex, social media, etc.).

In addition to marital crises, one must also consider the marital relationship itself, and one should not always seek blame in one partner. Sometimes a crisis appears without serious external causes. We should not always search, in every case, for adultery, parental interference, or economic problems, or pathological traits in one partner’s personality. It is simply a growing feeling of dissatisfaction, more often differing opinions, and feelings of disappointment. Marriage can go through two major crises in its life span: • the non-romanticism syndrome: usually between 3–6 and 7–9 years of marriage duration, lasting about one year. As it emerges, romanticism declines and differences appear between behavior during infatuation and present behavior. Co-living begins to be shaped by routine. This appears as a growing number of situations in which spouses cannot agree, hold different views, and negative emotions appear more often. • empty-nest syndrome: between 17–25 years of marriage, lasting one year or more. Its emergence is marked by children becoming independent and leaving home, creating a certain emptiness in the family. The configuration of the marital pair changes. A person becomes aware of aging and health problems emerge. Especially men seek new sexual experiences outside marriage. A midlife crisis may thus appear in this phase.

Family crisis is nothing new. Family has always been in crisis. However, problems were not resolved publicly and families did not always break apart. There was greater social control; people lived in smaller towns and knew each other. Today people live more anonymously; we no longer know our neighbors, and each person is concerned mainly with oneself and one’s own problems. We keep our problems to ourselves, and help rarely comes unless we ask for it. Changes in society and in people’s life patterns also cause changes in family life. A typical development has become the dual-career family, where both spouses are employed. This circumstance has given women opportunities for emancipation in marriage, including the possibility of ending marriage and raising children alone. New ways of living have also led to new forms of partnered life. It has become common to live without a marital partner, in childless cohabiting marriages of men and women without entering marriage, and in same-sex partnerships. “Based on these and other phenomena, in modern societies there has been talk in recent decades about a family crisis” (Sopóci, Búzik, 2006, p. 92). A functional family is characterized by a sense of reciprocity known as family mutuality. This is a sense of life security and background, relief, joy, and satisfaction—all of which affect the fulfillment of our psychological needs. One should enter marriage with awareness that an ideal marriage does not exist. If a spouse feels something is missing in marriage and family, behavior changes and the filling of missing feelings occurs outside the family. All this is recorded as crisis and, subsequently, family breakdown. And crisis is usually concluded by divorce. Different expectations between partners, differing values and ideas about lifestyle are often cited as the most frequent reasons for divorce. An unhealthy solution is unresolved crisis, which becomes chronic and creates an unhealthy family environment. In family crisis, resolution is necessary, ideally with professional help.

4 Divorce

“A court may dissolve a marriage at the request of one spouse if relations between spouses are so seriously disturbed and permanently disordered that the marriage cannot fulfill its purpose and the spouses cannot be expected to resume marital cohabitation” (§ 23(1) of Act No. 36/2005 Coll. on Family). Every family goes through various crises, disagreements, misunderstandings. This is nothing unusual; rather, these very situations often strengthen marriage and family. Marriage and family themselves should not be idealized. There is no model of a perfect family. Normality in family is determined by relationships, and these must be open in all dimensions of human life. That means if conflict arises in the family, we need not cowardly run away from it, but begin to resolve it. Unfortunately, sometimes the solution is often divorce. Yet divorce should not become an escape pattern for solving family and marital problems. Problems arising in family (between spouses) have different causes (Tuma, Maliňáková, 2013). Among the most common are loss of employment, illness, or death of a relative. Every major event marks family life in its own way. Some families cope with their difficulties and handle the difficult situation; others cannot absorb these stress situations and therefore solve them through divorce. Divorce is, in general, a more formal and legitimate ending of the marital relationship of two individuals (in our context, of opposite sex), a last-resort solution to marital disintegration. It differs from marital breakdown in that a petition for divorce is filed (with the competent court), and divorce proceeds through court proceedings with a final court ruling (Rusnáková, 2007).

People marry less often and at a later age. Divorce rates are rising. Press reports convey that more than every second marriage ends in divorce. The consequences are serious (Višňovský, 2007), affecting not only individuals who are divorcing but also their children, families, and society as a whole. This means divorce is seen not only as a private matter but as a serious social, social, and educational phenomenon. Divorce is currently considered a negative influence not only on family and marriage but also on child upbringing. A child suffers when parents argue, when conflicts and quarrels occur. Divorce is precisely that final full stop which means the end of the family. Children struggle with separation from one parent, and even when both parents care for the children after divorce, family becomes less meaningful to them. Divorce is often the worst solution a marriage can face. It breaks the family, separating spouses who had decided at marriage to become one unit, and separating children from parents, although both father and mother have equal rights toward their children and both have parental duties.

Tab. 1: Characteristics of marriage rates in the population of the Slovak Republic, 2001–2010

Source: http://portal.statistics.sk/files/889552629fe76da17d91704c7b89c675 [online] [cit. 04.06.2013]

Divorce affects children negatively in every case. In some children the crisis may not manifest at all, which can lead their parents to the mistaken conclusion that they were not affected. It is important to note, however, that a child has a psychological defense mechanism by which they may refuse to admit the fact and consistently deny reality so they do not have to experience the pain any divorce brings (Posse, 2002). Thus family is seen either as a source of happiness and satisfaction or, conversely, of great suffering. Many children and adults discover that the most effective physical, mental, social, moral, and emotional support is received precisely from family. Yet there are also many who, because of unhealthy family relationships, experience only pain, anxiety, and even violence in the worst cases. According to the latest statistical data, divorce occurs in every second (heterosexual) marriage (see the table below). From research (Pastor, 2012), we know that in heterosexual relationships, crisis and later divorce occur most often between 5 and 7 years of cohabitation, whereas in same-sex relationships separation tends to occur most often between 1.5 and 3.2 years of cohabitation. Thus, in same-sex partnerships and later families, spouse (partner) turnover occurs two to three times earlier than in heterosexual relationships. Children from same-sex families are more flexible toward life than children from heterosexual relationships.

Tab. 2: Selected characteristics of divorce in the Slovak Republic, 2001–2010

Source: http://portal.statistics.sk/files/889552629fe76da17d91704c7b89c675 [online] [cit. 04.06.2013]

Divorce rates belong to those demographic phenomena that are constantly discussed. Reasons for divorce are numerous, for example lack of financial resources for living, unemployment, personal problems of a parent caused by inability to provide independent care for children, a new partner and possibly their children as part of a new complete family, inability of one parent to manage upbringing, and so on. Despite many concerns, family remains at the top of Slovak value rankings. On the other hand, however, we repeatedly encounter the statement that the Slovak family is in crisis and does not fulfill all of its functions. This is undoubtedly influenced by the fact that many families fall into crisis, which ends in divorce, and this in many cases leads to necessary consequences for the fate of minors. Many divorcing marriages involve divorces with minor children. Divorce brings with it primarily psychological consequences for partners and above all for children, whose presence is predominant in divorcing marriages. In most cases, children remain in the mother’s care and become part of a single-parent family, which can, in current socioeconomic conditions, be a source of frustration for all its members. Alternatively, these children from heterosexual relationships may end up in a new same-sex family that the biological mother forms with her lesbian partner. Since in same-sex relationships partner exchange occurs between 1.5 and 3.2 years of cohabitation (Pastor, 2012), these children experience two to three parents over about 7 years, which are considered crisis periods even in heterosexual relationships and families. We distinguish the following phases of divorce: • initial phase – manifests as the increasing inner feeling of splitting apart. The partner who feels the problems more acutely decides on divorce. The other partner often ignores this feeling or does not know what to do. • starting phase – begins with the announcement of divorce. Decisions are not yet mature. On the initiator’s side, this phase is marked by unclear decision-making, while the other side is unpleasantly surprised. The triggering phase ends when the petitioner accepts ending the relationship. • asymmetrical phase – the decision phase in which one partner is already firmly decided on divorce and reconciled to it, while the other partner strives intensely to preserve it and tries to negotiate. • crisis phase – begins with shorter or longer separation of partners, they move out, or divide belongings. The partner who does not want the divorce in this phase already loses strength and gives up hope. Their motivation weakens and aversion to restoring the relationship grows. The manipulative pressure on the initiator is also lost. This phase passes gradually into the catastrophic (paradoxical) phase. • catastrophic phase – in this phase it is as if spouses swap roles. The initiator begins to realize what they may lose through divorce. In this phase there is the greatest chance of return. The paradoxical phase usually foreshadows either restoration of the relationship or its ending.

Divorce affects the entire future life that follows. It is a significant event with a number of social and other consequences. After divorce, economic and social statuses change. The functioning system of the family and child-rearing changes, as do relations with the wider family and friends. “Divorce belongs to one of the most painful and most complicated life events people experience. It tears relationships, interrupts the sense of continuity of life, and touches the very essence of human identity” (Everett, 2000, p. 11). Yet, as the author states, a healthy divorce is possible. This is linked to a willingness to understand emotions at the time of divorce and a constructive, civilized, and managed ending of marriage with minimal impact on parents and children. For a healthy divorce, it is necessary to look at the past, recognize the present, and reflect on what will follow. One should also consider what consequences divorce will have for everyone involved. Our wider family may be a support on one side, but through it we can also become exposed to criticism. Divorce should be approached holistically; it must not be viewed in black and white. We note that our position on divorce is negative—we oppose divorce—yet in the same breath, we add that in many cases divorce is, for at least one involved party, a form of liberation (if we mean tyranny, abuse, and similar situations). Society should not treat divorced people as stigmatized but should accept them as the parable of the prodigal son illustrates. It is not suitable to place “laws and rules” on the shoulders of divorced spouses that even their makers cannot bear themselves.

4 The impact of divorce on the child

Parents often mistakenly believe divorce is the best solution. Yet children paradoxically do not perceive divorce as some kind of relief. For them it is usually a very unpleasant and traumatic experience that brings many visible and hidden reactions. Among the most common we can include anger, confusion, fears, and guilt feelings. In older children, somatic problems have been observed, such as headaches and stomach pain without prior organic cause. Children may seem “fine” on the outside, and often parents underestimate this situation. Aside from the reasons why this is generally true, it is generally understood that boys cope with divorce more poorly than girls (this reversal may happen in puberty, when girls begin to face emotional issues), and also that as time passes, children adapt to the situation. Very important is the emotional stability of parents for better handling divorce by children. Most divorced parents begin to stabilize in the second year after divorce, and family problems subside. Children most affected are those aligned against one parent, those with no support in their environment, and those forced to live after divorce with both parents who hate each other in one apartment. Also affected are children who witness violence between parents. Unbalanced parental relationships toward children also have strongly negative effects. This sometimes appears as overprotective care, and at other times as indifference, disinterest, or severe punishment. The child becomes confused and this certainly does not benefit their psyche. On the other hand, children can adjust to divorce relatively well when they are not manipulated, not pressured, and feel safe with a strong emotional bond to at least one parent. It can also help if, in their environment, they find reliable support enabling emotional connection with a close person, and if they do not become witnesses to arguments and conflicts (Novák, 2007).

The most common reactions of children to parental divorce in each developmental stage are described below: Children from the prenatal period to two years: During this period, there is a risk of premature birth, sleep problems, and feeding difficulties. Children react to parental emotions with crying, fear, and sleeplessness. In this age, children like regularity, and any changes do not do them well. Children aged three to five years: A child’s behavior at this age corresponds to their young development level. Problems with falling asleep appear, and nightmares appear. The child does not yet understand the situation connected with divorce but fears abandonment. If one parent appears sporadically, anxious experiencing emerges. Children around six years: In the child, inattention and emotional instability appear. Divorce intensifies the strain associated with entering school. Deterioration of pronunciation, outbursts of aggression may occur, to which the environment responds with punishment and distancing from the child. All this can support guilt feelings linked to divorce. Sometimes increased accident proneness also appears. Children aged seven to ten years: The child feels fear and sadness compared to other children who have both parents. In this age, children provoke their parents, testing boundaries and what they are allowed to do. Psychosomatic symptoms are often present. Children aged eleven to thirteen years: In this age transition the child fully understands divorce and its consequences. They are often informed about the reasons in an unflattering way, often by peers. From that come negativism and hidden or open aggression. They already become aware of their “value on the divorce market” and may blackmail one or both parents. Likewise, a child may take over responsibility for a parent. The child wants to grow up as quickly as possible, sees the world in black-and-white terms, and behaves in extremes. Children aged fourteen to sixteen years: Pubertal mood swings and instability increase under the strain of divorce. Maintaining respect and authority over the child is difficult even without divorce. The child learns information they should not have and subsequently misuses it. Threats include anxiety, depression, and insecurity, which can lead to drug testing, delinquency, sexual promiscuity, and ultimately fear of the future. In this period the child creates their own identity, and disappointment in parents can have far-reaching effects on future intimate life. Children aged seventeen to nineteen years: At this age, adolescents turn to their own lives, independence, and interest-based activities; they show little tolerance for parents’ problems. They need care and support, but parents’ worries annoy and exhaust them. They need to speak about what they feel and experience themselves, not what their parents feel for them. They are glad when parents are satisfied and happy. The presence of a new partner of a parent brings mixed feelings—if they accept that person warmly, they may feel it as betrayal and disloyalty toward the other parent. In these children, risks include running away from home and also early marriages. (2)

5 Proposals, discussion, and recommendations for practice

We again want to emphasize that we are not arguing that people should divorce, nor do we wish to glorify or justify divorce. At the same time, we note that the issue of divorce cannot be viewed in black and white, because for many involved, even in Christian contexts, divorce is often a redemption from tyranny and abuse. Churches in Slovakia (at least not across the whole world) should begin addressing the issue of divorce and pastoral care for divorced people in a thorough and sophisticated way because at present, in churches one can often see that murderers, abusers, or people with many social-pathological symptoms appear closer “to the altar” (to sacraments and so on) than people after divorce. Not to mention children who, because of their parents’ divorce, are often exposed to ridicule by classmates, peers, and broader society. In light of the circumstances mentioned above, we propose the following practice points for divorced families:

  • Maintain regular contact with the child.
  • Do not drag children into divorce trauma, i.e., do not badmouth the other parent or attack them in their absence. In this case, the child does not have to demonstrate loyalty to one parent.
  • Do not use the child as a tool of revenge, for example, when one parent systematically provokes the child against the other parent and threatens punishment if the child receives anything from the second parent or goes somewhere with them. We call such positioning of a child the “rejected parent syndrome.” The situation escalates when contact with the second parent is blocked, inducing fear symptoms related to visiting that rejected parent, such as insomnia, crying, and bedwetting.
  • Do not blackmail or manipulate the child for one’s own benefit. The child then becomes what is called a “last straw of hope.” The parent who cannot reconcile with divorce contacts the other parent whenever there is supposedly something wrong with the child. In these conversations they seek to create the warmest possible atmosphere.
  • Do not use the child as a mediator, “go-between.” In ordinary language this is called the “postman child.” This situation occurs when parents are unable to communicate with one another. The child becomes the intermediary of their communication. For example, the child may pass on to the father how the mother evaluates their previous contact and what instructions the child has for the current meeting. Parents also try to find out information about what is happening in the other parent’s life, who they see, and so on. This role is not initially pleasant for the child, but it may become something to which they get used and then use to their own advantage. In some cases, this recommendation may develop into the position of child = substitute partner. In ordinary conversation, such children are also often called “weeping willows.” The parent with whom the child lives shares all worries with them and consults all serious decisions with them. Then the child automatically becomes an obstacle to the adult’s attempts to build a new relationship. But this does not bother the adult; sometimes they even welcome it.
  • Avoid neglect in child-rearing. This situation arises when parents are so absorbed and preoccupied by their own problems that they no longer care for the children. Then the child is neglected and often crosses legal boundaries in behavior, leaving the resolution of problems to state agencies or other organizations.

How can parents themselves help children after divorce? For example: communicate the problem; patiently answer difficult questions; avoid disrupting relationships children were used to; spend free time together. Parents love their children and want their good even after divorce. They hurt them out of ignorance and emotional tension. The only thing that should be conveyed to the child in this difficult period is that the child is not to blame for what happened, and that the parents’ relationship with the child will not fundamentally change.

Conclusion

Society tries to support the family and through state social policy creates suitable conditions for its functioning. Even in today’s complex times, family is still considered one of the most important life values. Ever more often we witness that family and marriage cannot be saved at any cost. Divorce, unfortunately, becomes a daily reality. And it does leave consequences. Divorce is often accompanied by various emotions. For children this is mostly anger, insecurity, and recognition that even those they trusted are capable of abandoning them. Family stability has suffered. Through divorce the family changes—enters a new situation; financial, housing, and other problems begin. In this period, actors often lack basic information on how to handle their problems. This is where a mediator, social pedagogue, or social worker can intervene and provide professional help. This support can even begin at the stage of considering divorce, when the abandoned partner often cannot cope with the situation and does not know how to behave. We can observe the effects of divorce on children’s social behavior during divorce, after divorce, and into deep adulthood. Unresolved inner conflicts in children lead to problematic attitudes, beliefs, and communication patterns. It is in the interest of the normal life of children from divorced families, as well as the divorced parents themselves, that timely expert support from professionals is provided. This is also in the interest of society, whose members are these children and parents, so that it supports reconciliation rather than the destruction of relationships.

Author: Doc. PaedDr. et PhDr. Pavol Tománek, PhD. List of literature used:

DOLISTA, J. - TŮMA, J. 2010. Problematika a prevence „nových náboženských hnutí“. Brno : L. Marek, 2010. s. 75-76. ISBN 978-80-87127-25-4. EIS, Z. 1994. Krize všedního dne. Praha : Grada Publishing. s. 30-85. EVERETT, C. – EVERETT, S. V. 2000. Zdravý rozvod pro rodiče a děti. Praha: TALPRESS, spol. s r.o. 212 s. ISBN80-7197-169-3. FEŠKOVÁ, Š. 2009. Rodina – najrizikovejší faktor vzniku porúch správania u žiakov? In Školský psycholog a kvalita školy. Nitra : UKF, 2009. s. 191-199. ISBN 978-80-8094-507-7. FRÝDKOVÁ, E. 2010.Rodičia ako edukační partneri školy. Trnava : Univerzita sv. Cyrila a Metoda v Trnave, 2010. 174 s. - ISBN 978-80-8105-200-2. KLIMPL, P. 1991. Psychická krize a krizová intervence. In Československá psychiatrie, roč. 87, č. 3-4. s. 71-77. KOSTRUB, D. 2008. Dieťa/žiak/študent - učivo - učiteľ, didaktický alebo bermudský trojuholník ? 1. vyd. Prešov : Rokus, 2008. s. 171 ISBN 978-80-89055-87-6 KOSTRUB, D. - TÓTHOVÁ, R. - SEVERINI, E. - SCHERHAUFEROVÁ, M. 2013. nvestigation of students concepts about learning and teaching process from aspect of learning theories. In Edukacja w kreowaniu współczesnej rzeczywistości : możliwości i ograniczenia 2, Siedlce : Uniwersytet Przyrodniczo-Humanistyczny, 2013 s. 205-215. ISBN 978-83-936635-1-4 KURUC, M. 2013. Poruchy správanie u detí a adolescentov a ich pedagogická diagnostika. Bratislava : UK, 2013. 65 s. ISBN 978-80-223-3512-6. LACKOVÁ, D. - VALÁŠKOVÁ, M. 2011. Možnosti využitia niektorých prvkov e-learningu vo vzdelávaní a učení sa detí predškolského veku. In Inovačný proces v e-learningu. [CD-ROM]. Ekonóm: 2011. s. 1 -8. ISBN 978-80-225-3112-2. Metodický materiál Ústredia PSVaR – práca so systémom rodiny v rozvode. NOVÁK, T. – PRŮCHOVÁ, B. 2007. Předrozvodové a rozvodové poradenství. Praha: Grada Publishing, spol. s.r.o. 288 s. ISBN 978-80-247-1449-3. NOVÁK, T. 2000. Rodičovské judo – dítě během rozvodového řízení. Praha: GradaPublishing, spol. s r.o. 92 s. ISBN 80-247000-2-6. Občiansky zákonník (1964). Bratislava : Epos, 2006. 175 s. ISBN 808057684X. PASTOR, K. 2012. Demografické faktory stability manželstva. Bratislava : Teologická fakulta Katolíckej univerzity v Ružomberku. Inštitút Jána Pavla II. v Bratislave. In Rodina v treťom tisícročí – Familiaris consortio –nádej pre súčasnú rodinu. s. 262-268. ISBN 978-80-971162-8-6. POSSE, R. 2002. Umenie výchovy. Vrútky : vyd. Advent-Orion, Vrútky. 194 s. ISBN 80-88960-89-4. PREVENDÁROVÁ, J. 1998. Rodina s postihnutým dieťaťom. Nové Zámky : Psychoprof spol. s r. o., Artus. ISBN 80-976148-9-9. RUSNÁKOVÁ, M. 2007. Rodina v slovenskej spoločnosti. Ružomerok : Pedagogická fakulta Katolíckej univerzity, Ružomberok. 167 s. ISBN 978-80-8084-248-2. SOPÓCI, J. – BÚZIK, B. 2006, Základy sociológie, Bratislava: SPN - Mladé letá. 144 s. ISBN 80-10-00917-2. TAMÁŠOVÁ, V. 2007. Teória a prax rodinnej edukácie. 2. vyd. Ivanka pri Dunaji:AXIMA. 210 s. ISBN 978-80-969178-3-9. TOMÁNEK, P. 2012a. Nové podoby rodiny. In Lifelong learning, roč. 2, č. 3, s. 44-63. ISSN1804-526X. TOMÁNEK, P. 2012b. Teoretické východiská rodinnej výchovy. Brno : Tribun. 165 s. ISBN 978-80-263-0233-9. TŮMA, J. 2013. Význam potřeb v životě jedince. In Zdravý způsob života, Ukrajina : Lvov, 2013, roč. 11 (77), s. 38-40. ISSN 2307-0722. TŮMA, J., MALIŇÁKOVÁ, L. 2013. The Importance of the social services in the social family policy in Czech Republic. In Clinical Social Work. Austria : Vienna, no.2, vol.4, 2013, s. 95-99. ISSN 2222-386X. TŮMA, J., POŽÁREK, P. 2013a. Aktuální pohled na manželství a rodinu. In Zdravý způsob života, Ukrajina : Lvov, 2013, roč. 13 (79), s. 30-32. ISSN 2307-0722. VIŠŇOVSKÝ, Ľ. a kol. 2007. Základy rodinnej výchovy. 1. vyd. Banská Bystrica: Univerzita Mateja Bela, Pedagogická fakulta. 198 s. ISBN 978-80-8083-443-2. VODÁČKOVÁ, D. a kol. 2007. Krizová intervence. Praha: Portál. 544 s. ISBN 978- 80-7367-342-0. Zákon č. 154/1994 Z.z. NR SR o matrikách, jeho druhá časť - paragrafy § 27-30. Zákon č. 460/1992 Zb. Ústava Slovenskej republiky v znení neskorších predpisov. Zákon č. 420/2004 Z.z o mediácii a o doplnení niektorých zákonov. Zákon č. 36/2005 Z.z. o rodine a o zmene a doplnení niektorých zákonov. Zákon č. 305/2005 Z. z. o sociálnoprávnej ochrane detí a o sociálnej kuratele a o zmene a doplnení niektorých zákonov.

Internet sources:

Demographic development. [online] Available at: http://portal.statistics.sk/files/889552629fe76da17d91704c7b89c675 [cit. 17.3.2012] Gay family? [online] Available at: www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/...78/gay-family-parents-lgbt.html.csp [cit. 04.06.2013]

(1) Available: http://portal.statistics.sk/files/889552629fe76da17d91704c7b89c675 [cit. 17.3.2012] (2) Methodological material of the Center for Pedagogical Counseling of Family Systems in Divorce.