A child's time cannot wait: custody, visitation and the bond with the other parent

In Morocco, the law gives custody to the mother first; in France there is no such priority, yet the child's residence is most often set with her. Other countries (Belgium, Sweden, Spain, several US states) start instead from shared residence, including for young children. A comparison, the figures, and what psychological research shows: why a child's bond with both parents cannot wait.

In most of the cases the association follows, the same scenario repeats itself. When the parents separate, the child stays with the mother. The father obtains, often after several months, visitation rights of a few hours a week. At the slightest disagreement (a move, a visit that does not take place), a new procedure has to be started, and then there is more waiting. Meanwhile, the child grows up. This piece is not meant to set mothers against fathers. It asks a question that international law itself asks: how can a child's right to keep both parents be guaranteed in practice, and in time?

Custody assigned "by default"

In Morocco, Article 171 of the Family Code sets an order: custody goes first to the mother, then to the father, then to the maternal grandmother. The father remains the child's legal guardian and, if he does not have custody, has visitation rights (Articles 180 to 184), the terms of which are set by agreement between the parents or, failing that, by the court.

In France, the law sets no priority: parental authority is exercised jointly, and the child's residence can be alternating or with one parent (Article 373-2-9 of the Civil Code). In practice, however, a Ministry of Justice study of decisions handed down in 2012 found that residence was set with the mother for 71% of children, alternating for 17% and with the father for 12%, most often because that is what the parents had asked for.

In both countries, the outcome for the child is often the same: one parent in daily life, and another they see a few hours a week, or every other weekend at best.

What international law says

Morocco and France have both ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). It speaks neither of a "main parent" nor of a "visiting parent":

Article 3: in all actions concerning children, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.
Article 9(3): a child separated from one parent has the right to maintain personal relations and direct contact with both parents on a regular basis, except if this is contrary to the child's best interests.
Article 10(2): a child whose parents reside in different States has the right to maintain, save in exceptional circumstances, personal relations and direct contacts with both parents on a regular basis.
Article 11: States shall take measures to combat the illicit transfer and non-return of children abroad.
Article 18(1): both parents have common responsibilities for the upbringing and development of the child.

For cross-border situations, the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, to which Morocco and France are both parties, requires authorities to act expeditiously: if no decision has been reached within six weeks, a statement of the reasons for the delay may be requested (Article 11). It also aims to secure the effective exercise of rights of access (Article 21).

We have devoted a detailed article to Articles 3, 9 and 18 of the CRC. The common thread is clear: the child has a right to both parents, and the child's interests are to be read from that right.

Elsewhere in the world: shared residence as the starting point

A growing number of countries have made the opposite choice: starting from the principle that the child keeps living with both parents, even when very young, and departing from it only when the child's interests require it.

Morocco: custody goes first to the mother (Article 171 of the Family Code), with visitation rights for the father. The law makes no provision for shared residence, and no public statistics break down the residence arrangements decided after separation.
France: no legal priority; alternating residence has been possible since the law of 4 March 2002. It applied to 17% of children in 2012 decisions, up from 10% in 2003.
Belgium: since the law of 18 July 2006, when at least one parent asks for it, the judge must examine equal residence as a priority (Article 374 of the Civil Code) and give specific reasons if it is set aside.
Sweden: joint parental responsibility is the rule. 35% of children whose parents do not live together live roughly equally with each of them (Statistics Sweden, 2014), up from 1% in the 1980s.
Spain: since a ruling of 29 April 2013, the Supreme Court has held shared custody to be "normal and even desirable". It overtook maternal custody for the first time in 2023, and in 2025 it was ordered in 50.8% of divorces involving minor children, against 45.3% for the mother and 3.4% for the father (National Statistics Institute, INE).
United States: in 2018 Kentucky became the first state to write into law a presumption of joint custody and equal parenting time; Florida followed in 2023. The judge may depart from it when it is shown that the child's interests require it.

At European level, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, in Resolution 2079 (2015), called on States to introduce into their laws the principle of shared residence following a separation, limiting exceptions to cases of child abuse or neglect, or domestic violence, with the time the child lives with each parent adjusted to the child's needs and interests.

These countries care no less about the child's interests; they draw a different conclusion from them. The reform of the Family Code now under way in Morocco is an opportunity to examine this approach.

Time is not neutral for a child

Proceedings take time: applications, summonses, expert reports, appeals, enforcement. For an adult, a few months are an interlude. For a three-year-old, they are a considerable part of their life, and it is precisely the age at which attachment bonds are formed.

A child attaches to those who care for them every day: those who put them to bed, feed them, comfort them, take them to school. Developmental psychology research shows that a child can perfectly well attach to both parents, provided they spend real time with each, made of ordinary moments (meals, nights, journeys, homework). A consensus report published in 2014 and endorsed by 110 researchers and practitioners thus recommends that each parent keep a significant place in the child's daily life, including for young children. A few hours a week in a neutral place do not allow for this: little by little, the other parent becomes a visitor.

The child does not choose this imbalance. They adapt to what they live, and what they live is a schedule set by adults.

What the research shows

The question has been studied extensively, especially in Sweden, where shared residence is common enough to be compared on a large scale.

Adolescents: a Karolinska Institutet study of nearly 148,000 Swedish pupils aged 12 and 15 (Bergström et al., 2015) found that children of separated parents report more psychosomatic problems on average than those in intact families, but that the gap is markedly smaller for those in shared residence than for those living mostly or only with one parent.
Children aged 3 to 5: among 3,656 preschool children, the same team (Bergström et al., 2018) found fewer psychological symptoms in those living in shared residence than in those living mostly or only with one parent.
Infants and toddlers: an Arizona State University study (Fabricius & Suh, 2017) followed young adults whose parents had separated before they turned three. Those who had overnights with their father in early childhood had, at 18 to 20, better relationships with their father and their mother; the best relationships with both parents were found among those who had equal numbers of overnights with each, including before the age of one. The findings held when parental conflict was high.
A review of 60 studies: psychologist Linda Nielsen (Wake Forest University, 2018) compared 60 studies of shared versus sole physical custody. Children in shared residence had better outcomes on all measures in 34 studies, equal or better outcomes in 20 others, and a worse outcome on a single measure in 6 studies. The advantage held after accounting for family income and conflict.
Expert consensus: the 2014 consensus report cited above, endorsed by 110 researchers and practitioners, concludes that there is no evidence to justify postponing regular and frequent involvement of both parents, overnights included, with babies and toddlers.

These studies describe trends, not absolute rules: none recommends shared residence where a parent is violent or abusive, and the schedule must always suit the child's age. But they agree on one point: for the vast majority of children, keeping a real place with each parent from the earliest age is a protective factor, not a risk.

A parent without news of their child

Reduced to a few hours of visitation, the non-custodial parent also loses access to information: school, health, friendships, changes of address. A child has no point of comparison; what they live every day seems normal to them, even when it is not good for them, and they will not always be able to say so. The parent who rarely sees them is in no position to notice, or to raise the alarm in time.

French law requires each parent to "maintain personal relations with the child and respect the child's ties with the other parent", and to inform the other parent, in advance and in good time, of any change of residence that alters how parental authority is exercised (Article 373-2 of the Civil Code). In Morocco, the legal guardianship held by the father likewise presupposes that he is informed of important decisions concerning his child.

Hundreds of kilometres for a few hours

When the custodial parent moves far away, to another city or sometimes another country, visitation rights often remain set in hours. The travelling parent then covers hundreds or even thousands of kilometres, at their own expense, for a visit of a few hours, with the risk of finding the door closed. The testimony of a father who travels 2,000 kilometres every Sunday shows this cost, which is rarely taken into account.

The law nonetheless offers some levers. In Morocco, Article 178 of the Family Code provides that the custodial mother's move within the country does not in itself end her custody, but that the court may take it into account in light of the child's interests, the father's situation and the distance between them. In France, when parents disagree about a move, the judge divides travel costs between them and adjusts child support accordingly (Article 373-2 of the Civil Code). Taking account of the effort made by the parent who travels also means taking account of the child's interests: a parent worn out or ruined by the journeys will one day no longer be able to come.

Where the sense of injustice comes from

Many of the fathers we support say they feel they are in a weak position. This feeling owes less to the law than to deep-rooted social attitudes: the idea that a child "naturally" belongs with the mother, that a father can make do with a few hours and paying support, that it is better not to "disrupt" the child. It also reflects a practical reality: it is the non-custodial parent who has to start proceedings, gather evidence, travel and wait. Every missed visit and every unannounced move that is not dealt with quickly tends to recur, and then to settle in as the new normal.

And it is not the father who pays the highest price. It is the child: in their well-being, their psychological balance and their relationship with their own origins.

What the association is asking for

Prompt handling of custody and visitation cases, in the spirit of the urgency the Hague Convention already requires in international situations, so that the length of the proceedings does not decide in the judge's place.
Interim visitation rights set at the very start of proceedings, so that the bond is never broken while the case is pending. Article 121 of the Family Code already allows the court, in a dispute between spouses, to order interim measures concerning the children pending judgment.
Genuinely meaningful time (overnights, weekends, holidays) rather than a few hours in a neutral place, and, where both parents are able, serious consideration of balanced shared parenting.
That the ongoing reform consider shared residence as the starting point, from the earliest age and with a schedule suited to the child's age, limiting exceptions to cases of violence, abuse or neglect, as the Council of Europe recommends.
Arrangements adapted to distance: visits grouped over longer periods, shared travel costs, regular phone or video contact as a complement, never as a replacement for being there.
Mandatory prior notice of any change in the child's home, and effective access for the non-custodial parent to school and medical information.
A quick response to the first breaches, including through family mediation, before they become a habit. When a child is repeatedly withheld, the law provides for penalties: see our article on repeat non-presentation of a child.

This is not about taking anything away from any mother. It is about giving the child what every text already recognises: the right to grow up with both parents, now, not at the end of a court case.