Ned Holstein Shared Parenting Research Annual Award

National Parents Organization is child focused and research based; we rely on the best scientific research available in our advocacy for children’s right to a full parent/child relationship with both fit and loving parents following parental separation. In pursuit of its mission, NPO highlights some of the most significant shared parenting research on its website. NPO organized and conducted the highly significant 2017 International Conference on Shared Parenting, which brought together leading experts from around the world to present the state of the science on child well-being when parents are living apart. And NPO has made the videos of presentations at that conference available for free.

In order to further highlight the best research on child well-being after parental separation, National Parents Organization has established two research awards, both named in honor of Ned Holstein, the founder of NPO who set the organization on its child focused, research based path.

Below, we announce the winners of the Annual NPO Ned Holstein Shared Parenting Research Award.

Daniel Fernández-Kranz

Natalia Nollenberger

Jennifer Roff

The research Daniel Fernández-Kranz, Natalia Nollenberger, and Jennifer Roff published in "Bargaining Under Threats: The Effect of Joint Custody Laws on Intimate Partner Violence" is the most significant research available on the effects of presumptions of shared physical custody on the incidence of intimate partner violence. Spain presented a “natural experiment” when five of its juridical regions adopted presumptions of joint physical custody of children after divorce, increasing the rate of joint physical custody four-fold in just five years. Fernández-Kranz, Nollenberger, & Roff found that the presumption of shared physical custody “led to a large and significant decrease in intimate partner violence, with the largest effects among couples in which the mother was more likely to seek sole custody before the policy change” (p. 1, emphasis added). The policy “significantly decreased domestic violence, with IPV falling by almost 50%” (p. 3, emphasis added). And they also found “evidence of a significant reduction of the number of female homicides committed by intimate partners after the joint custody reform” (p. 3, emphasis added).

Honorable Mention

Emma Johnson, “The 50/50 Solution”

 

The 50/50 Solution presents in an accessible and engaging way the best research available on the benefits of equal shared parenting for mothers, fathers, and children. In a remarkably lucid and compelling way, it provides readers—parents, divorce professionals, and the general public—with a strong understanding of the concept and value of equal shared parenting. It also addresses very effectively the concerns that have been raised against legal presumptions of 50/50 shared parenting. The book makes eminently clear why “equal shared parenting is the custody framework of the future” and it helps, even more importantly, it helps to accelerate our progress toward that future.

Jennifer Harman

Christine Giancarlo

Demosthenes Lorandos

Brian Ludmer

The research that Harman et al. published in “Gender and Child Custody Outcomes Across 16 Years of Judicial Decisions Regarding Abuse and Parental Alienation” (Children and Youth Services Review, 2023) is a model of excellence for research related to NPO’s mission—something  attested to by the fact that it was nominated for the award by multiple leading researchers. In an area of research where some are publishing flawed, agenda-driven, research in non-peer-reviewed venues, their paper sets a standard for quality. By pre-registering the hypotheses tested, they avoided the risk of “harking” (hypothesizing after results are known). By publishing detailed information on the research methodology and coding of data, they allow other researchers to test their hypotheses on other data sets.

In brief, this paper is simply the best research available addressing the issue of how courts are handling cross-allegations of child abuse and parental alienation.

2022 NPO Ned Holstein Shared Parenting Research Award

Daniel Fernández-Kranz & Natalia Nollenberger, “The Impact of Equal Parenting Time Laws on Family Outcomes and Risky Behavior by Teenagers: Evidence from Spain”

 

Daniel Fernández-Kranz

 

Natalia Nollenberger

 

The research Daniel Fernández-Kranz and Natalia Nollenberger published, “The Impact of Equal Parenting Time Laws on Family Outcomes and Risky Behavior by Teenagers: Evidence from Spain” (Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 195 (2022) 303-325), is a model of excellence in shared parenting research. Like the 2020 paper they co-authored with Professor Jennifer Roff,  “Bargaining under Threats: The Effect of Joint Custody Laws on Intimate Partner Violence” (IZA Discussion Papers, No. 13810, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), Bonn), their 2022 paper analyzes data from Spain’s “natural experiment” concerning the effects of presumptive equal shared physical custody.


“The Impact of Equal Parenting Time Laws on Family Outcomes and Risky Behavior by Teenagers: Evidence from Spain” addresses a number of central questions about the effects of presumptions of equal shared parenting (ESP). It indicates that such presumptions have a salutary effect on the incidence of risky behavior by teenage children of divorced parents, on the employment opportunities for mothers, and, importantly, on the frequency of contentious (contested) divorces. The first conclusion adds to the considerable evidence of the benefits of ESP for children. The second contributes to a currently under-researched area of the benefits of ESP for mothers. And, the third is important for two reasons. Opponents of presumptions of ESP have frequently opined, without evidence, that such presumptions will increase the contentiousness of divorce proceedings. Their research challenges this objection. And, all agree that persistent parental conflict is harmful to children, their research suggests, again, that presumptions of ESP are part of the solution to addressing the problems caused by our divorce laws and policies.

2021 NPO Ned Holstein Shared Parenting Research Award

Sanford Braver & Ashley Votruba, “Does Shared Parenting “Cause” Children’s Better Outcomes?”

Ashley Votruba

Sanford Braver

Professors Braver and Votruba’s research reported in  “Does Joint Physical Custody “Cause” Children’s Better Outcomes?” (The Routledge International Handbook of Shared Parenting and Best Interest of the Child, ed. by José Manuel de Torres Perea, Edward Kruk, Margarita Ortiz-Tallo, Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2021), is a model of excellence in shared parenting research that sets a standard for future awards.

Establishing causal connections in social science research is always challenging—especially where controlled experiments are impossible. Some have alleged that the well-established correlation between shared physical custody and improved outcomes for children is completely explained by self-selection effects—those parents who choose joint physical custody have other characteristics that cause these better outcomes for children. Determining whether the self-selection hypothesis is correct or, rather, that the correlation obtains because shared physical custody produces these benefits is vital if we are to provide firm grounding for our laws and policies regarding separated parenting.

“Does Joint Physical Custody “Cause” Children’s Better Outcomes?” is a masterful examination of the most sophisticated techniques available for determining the causal relationship between shared physical custody and better outcomes for children. And based on that review and the available evidence, it draws several consequential conclusions:

  • “The weight of the recent evidence indicates that self-selection effects do not largely account for the benefits of JPC in the empirical literature”;

  • “JPC [joint physical custody] probably does cause benefits to children on average”;

  • “[T]here is now substantially more evidence for the presumption [of joint physical custody] than against it”; and,

  • “[T]he burden of persuasion has shifted to those who oppose a presumption of JPC”.