Joint physical custody, a parental care arrangement in which a child lives with each parent about equally after separation or divorce, is an increasingly common phenomenon in many Western countries. Although attention from family scholars, practitioners, and law professionals is growing, there are hardly any numbers on the prevalence of joint physical custody (JPC). Moreover, studies using large‐scale representative data on the effects of JPC for children’s well‐being are still rare. The data for this study come from Health Behaviour in School‐Aged Children (HBSC), a representative cross‐national survey of adolescents in 37 European and North American countries that was conducted in 2002, 2006, and 2010 and included information on students at the ages of 11, 13, and 15 years (N = 92,886). First, results revealed that symmetrical JPC after family dissolution is still very rare in the majority of countries (5% or less), but reaches 10–20% in some countries. Second, adolescents’ life satisfaction in nonintact families is higher in symmetric JPC arrangements than in asymmetric care arrangements. However, after controlling for children and family characteristics, the differences disappear. Thus, it is not the symmetric JPC arrangement that induces adolescents’ higher life satisfaction, but rather the children and family characteristics that are associated with the choice of such a custody arrangement by separated or divorced parents.

Joint physical custody (JPC), a parental care arrangement in which children live with each parent about equally after separation or divorce, is an increasingly common phenomenon in many countries. This is a major shift away from the standard of sole physical custody (SPC), in which children live primarily with one parent (usually their mother) after family dissolution. Although attention to JPC by social scientists is growing, and the effects of this arrangement on children's well-being are the subject of highly ideological debates, there is currently little empirical evidence with statistical power on JPC. Using data from Family Models in Germany (FAMOD), a survey of postseparation families conducted in 2019, we estimated four linear regression models for children aged 2-14 in SPC and JPC families, with analytic samples of up to 1,161 cases. We investigated the association between physical custody arrangements after separation or divorce and four dimensions of children's well-being: psychological, physical, social, and cognitive/ educational. The bivariate results provided support for the hypothesis that children living in JPC families fare significantly better than children living in SPC families on all four dimensions of well-being. However, after controlling for a set of child, parent, and separation characteristics, as well as for the quality of family relationships, the differences between children from SPC and JPC families disappeared. Additional analyses revealed that the parent-child relationships fully mediated this association. In sum, the quality of family relationships accounted for the positive association between JPC and children's well-being in this study.

Objective: This study investigated the relationship between joint physical custody and children’s mental health, and tested whether interparental conflict moderated the association. Background: Joint physical custody is an emerging post-separation care arrangement that is expected to counter the negative effects of family dissolution on children’s overall well-being. There is, however, substantial disagreement about the impact that joint physical custody may have on children’s mental health when interparental conflict is high. Method: The statistical analysis was based on data from the Family Models in Germany (FAMOD) study, which was conducted in 2019. The analytical sample consisted of 1,087 post-separation families practicing either sole physical custody or joint physical custody. Linear regression models were estimated to determine the relationship between physical custody arrangements, interparental conflict, and children’s mental health problems. Results: Living in a joint physical custody arrangement was positively related to children's mental health, whereas high levels of interparental conflict were negatively related to children's mental health. However, when levels of interparental conflict were high children in joint physical custody arrangements displayed levels of mental health problems that were quite similar to those of children in sole physical custody arrangements. Conclusion: The findings emphasize that joint physical custody is not a "one-size-fits-all model" that is suitable for all post-separation families, and that it is only beneficial for children's mental health when interparental conflict is low.

Objective The objective of the study was to examine patterns of parenting time schedules in joint physical custody (JPC) arrangements. Background Although the importance of contact with the non‐residential parent for children's well‐being after family dissolution is well‐documented, the measures used in surveys are often crude and do not capture the two dimensions of post‐separation parenting time schedules: the proportion of time children spend with each parent and the number of transitions children make between parental homes. Method The analyses are based on the Family Models in Germany study, a German sample of families with children aged 0–14 that was conducted in 2019. As this study includes a residential calendar capturing the children's stays with each parent over 4 weeks, it was possible to calculate both dimensions of post‐separation parenting time schedules for 463 JPC families. Results The results revealed that 55.5% of JPC families practiced an asymmetric (at least 30% with one parent) and 44.5% practiced a symmetric care arrangement (50% with each parent). The mean number of transitions children experienced was 9.5 within a month. The factors that were found to be positively associated with practicing symmetric JPC were working hours of the responding parent and parents' relationship quality. However, working hours of the responding parent and the distance between the parents' homes reduced the number of transitions between the parents' homes, whereas a good parental relationship increased them. Conclusion Empirical investigations of children in post‐separation families should take the two dimensions of physical custody into account.

Aim The prevalence of psychosomatic complaints among children and adolescents appears to be increasing. At the same time, the numbers of joint physical custody families are rising across Western countries. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between post-separation care arrangements (joint physical custody vs. sole physical custody) and children’s risks of psychosomatic problems, while considering the potential mediating role of parent–child relationships. Subject and methods Based on data from the Family Models in Germany (FAMOD) study, stepwise linear regression models and seemingly unrelated regression models were estimated for a sample of 473 children aged seven to 14 living in either sole physical custody or joint physical custody families. Results Children in joint physical custody families reported significantly fewer psychosomatic problems than children in sole physical custody families. Furthermore, living in a joint physical custody arrangement was associated with better parent–child relationships, although only the mother–child relationship was significantly related to children’s psychosomatic complaints, and partially mediated the association between physical custody arrangements and children’s psychosomatic complaints. No corresponding association could be found with respect to the father–child relationship. Conclusion The risk of psychosomatic problems was distributed unequally among post-separation families, as children living in joint physical custody arrangements suffered from fewer psychosomatic problems than children living in sole physical custody arrangements. Because part of this association was explained by the quality of the mother–child relationship, children’s relationships with other family members appear to be important factors to consider when seeking to promote children’s health in post-separation care arrangements.