To think co-parenting is often just damage control for a bad decision?

[ThisSharpJadeDreamer]

“We’re putting the child first” usually means “we’re trying to minimise the fallout.”

But in public discourse, especially online, there’s often a tendency to praise ‘healthy co-parenting’ as though it’s a win in itself, without acknowledging the loss or harm that made it necessary.

Healthy coparenting is a win in itself, it’s not easy, takes intentional action on the part of parents who are also navigating an often painful breakup. Do you think every conversation about coparenting should have a caveat attached? Should parents beat their breasts in shame while talking about coparenting? What is it you want here.

But nobody ever admits it. What's that about? Possibly shame over becoming dehydrated makes people act like they're just drinking for no reason.

What I’m questioning is how often co-parenting gets presented as inherently ideal or aspirational rather than what it often is: a thoughtful and necessary response to a painful shift

I have never seen this, co parenting is quite obviously making the best of a bad situation , I've never seen it presented as aspirational or ideal.

I’m absolutely not criticising co-parenting itself, I agree that doing it well is mature and necessary, especially when the alternative is conflict or neglect. I’m also not saying divorce is inherently a bad decision, sometimes it’s the right one.

My point is more about the narrative framing we often use. We sometimes hear co-parenting described in glowing terms, almost as though it’s an ideal in itself when in reality, it usually arises because something difficult has happened. It’s damage control done well and I think we can name that without implying shame or failure. It’s possible to respect people for navigating a tough situation well and still acknowledge that the situation itself likely isn’t what anyone would’ve hoped for at the start.

“We’re putting the child first” usually means “we’re trying to minimise the fallout.”

Well yes. That's exactly what trying to co-parent well is.

What would you rather people said?

But you haven't answered the question several posters have asked -- where exactly are you hearing this 'narrative framing' of co-parenting in 'glowing terms'? Because no one else is hearing it.

I always presumed it was damage limitation and nothing else. I don't believe its romanticised. In the same way a blended family is another word for a few broken families trying to struggle along. I think most people would agree it would be much better for children to be raised in a nuclear family with two loving parents who also love each other. Sadly that's not always the case. People who are co parenting or starting blended families are just doing their best with the circumstances they have found themselves in.

I think most people realise that the need for co parenting has arisen from a less than ideal situation, nobody has to preface it with a statement saying so.

Ok I think I’m catching the thread….

What I’m questioning is how often co-parenting gets presented as inherently ideal or aspirational rather than what it often is: a thoughtful and necessary response to a painful shift.

@ThisSharpJadeDreamer

You are conflating the pre breakup and post breakup.

Here’s my take. Co-parenting is the ideal and aspiration post breakup. There is not a better scenario for post break up child rearing. At the same time it’s also not the ‘ideal’ situation of a healthy/loving pre breakup 2 parent home.

In other words a phrase I use often… (in this case co-parenting) is the best case of the worst case scenario.

This is all so glaringly obvious I don’t think it needs lengthy paragraphs or a thread at all though.

I have never seen co parenting presented as aspirational

Apart from for people who are already divorced or or split

Sounds like you are saying co parenting is being presented as an ideal family set up, better than two parents in the same home.

I am confused also about your point! Please give examples! Was your post triggered by someone you know IRL?

I don’t think anyone, on their wedding day is quietly aspiring to have children, then get divorced and coparent. So, I don’t think aspirational is in any sense true.

But a successful coparenting relationship has pluses as well as minuses for children. In my case they get more and different types of holidays, different foods (as we both cook slightly differently) and two sets of rooms and places to keep things (admittedly a downside too).

Of course, divorce is traumatic, and it affects children and, at the beginning, it is about coping. But it can evolve into a positive experience for all concerned.

I’m not saying there are think pieces everywhere saying “co-parenting is the dream!” I’m talking more about the tone and framing you often see in media stories, social posts, or even in casual conversations. Phrases like “we’re great co-parents” or “we put the child first and it’s actually better this way” can sometimes gloss over the emotional complexity and very real impact of the split.

To be clear, I think doing co-parenting well is commendable but I also think we can hold space for the fact that it’s a response to a hard situation, not an aspirational one. That nuance often gets lost in how it’s discussed.

Also this ⬆️

No, no it doesn’t. Nothing is getting lost. Nobody is ever going to try to be a co-parent pre-breakup. It will never be a goal for aspiring lovers and parents to one day be in a co-parent relationship.

None of those things will be true.

You are seeing a problem where there is none.

It isn’t glossing over the damage of the split, though, @ThisSharpJadeDreamer - it is two people who, for whatever reason cannot stay together, making sure that this does as little damage as possible to the children involved. It is surely better than staying in a bad, unhappy marriage/relationship ‘for the sake of the children’ - because this can do as much damage (maybe much more damage) to the children involved than two separated parents who are co-parenting well.

Yes, that’s really close to what I mean and I appreciate how you put it. I’m not against recognising when co-parenting is done well, especially when the alternative is chaos or hostility. But I do think we sometimes skip past the reality that, for most kids, the ideal would’ve been not needing to co-parent in the first place because the relationship stayed healthy and intact.

It’s the lack of acknowledgment that sometimes feels like a missing piece - as if saying “we’re co-parenting great!” replaces any reflection on what came before. Both things can be true: people can be doing an admirable job with the situation now and that situation can still be the result of pain or loss.

Not necessarily a bad decision, some relationships breakdown despite the best of intentions and good decisions. But of course, "co-parenting" is just positive spin that means one parent hasn't decided to fuck off entirely. pretty low bar for civilised people imho.

What do you want to call it? Shameful post divorce parenting?

Phrases like “we’re great co-parents” or “we put the child first and it’s actually better this way” can sometimes gloss over the emotional complexity and very real impact of the split.

So you’d rather people said “of course we fucked our kids by separating but we’re doing the best we can in the circumstances”. Or “we obviously didn’t put the children first because we separated but we can at least make joint decisions”? I honestly don’t understand what it is you want people to say when talking about coparenting well together.

Hmmm.
For women who get pregnant by partners they never wanted to have a child with in the first place, or never wanted to be with long-term, coparenting might well be a more 'hoped for' outcome than a long-term committed romantic relationship with them.

Many people are much happier and better off as co-parents than as life partners. It can genuinely be the better outcome for everyone.

Yes, broadly speaking you are probably right that it's usually a sign that something difficult has happened, be that a divorce, breakup or unplanned pregnancy. These experiences can of course be very damaging and even traumatic. But not all breakups are damaging. And if positive views of coparenting are a positive narrative reframing, so what? What's so wrong with that? It might not be the situation most people would choose but it can still end up as a really good situation, or at least as a decent one, and I don't see anything false / dishonest about promoting that in a world still dominated by negative stereotypes of post-divorce parental conflict (after all, things only need to be reframed positively when they are being too harshly maligned!). It's a bit like someone saying 'that chocolate in the Celebrations tin that everyone says is shit is actually still fine and some people even like it' (for me that would be Bounty).

So what would this 'holding space' look like exactly? Anytime someone discusses their healthy co-parenting relationship they have to acknowledge that it's only come about because of a break up?! Why? EVERYONE knows that's why people are co-parenting? No disclaimer is necessary.

Well.exactly.

It’s not about blaming people for trying - it’s about being honest about the context.

Who's being dishonest?

I think, OP, you've fundamentally minunderstood the narrative around it and that's why you're finding it so difficult to make yourself understood on here and why you thought it was necessary to start a thread at all.

OP, was trying to have a dig at single parents and is now trying to backpedal

Exactly. It's such a perplexing viewpoint.