Best Interests of the Child in Narratives on Joint Physical Custody

This study examines how the Best Interests of the Child (BIC) are constructed in the narratives of Joint Physical Custody (JPC) proponents (father activists), doubters (mother activists), and decision-makers (judges). Focusing on Poland, it explores how these narratives reflect the recognition of child agency after parental separation. This study is theoretically informed by the Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) and by the concept of BIC. It draws on 53 court rulings, 16 citizen petitions, and transcripts from five parliamentary sessions as well as 5 in-depth interviews (IDIs) with father activists, 4 with mother activists, and 8 with judges. The construction of BIC differs across the narratives of father/mother activists and judges. Fathers emphasize the child’s right to maintain contact with both parents. Mothers highlight the child’s voice and need for safety. Judges’ accounts, often ambivalent, lean toward maternal perspectives. At the same time, all three groups portrayed the child as a victim lacking agency in the aftermath of parental separation. Despite affirmations of BIC in the narratives of father/mother activists and judges, their portrayals of post-separation contexts reveal a marginalization of child agency, exposing a gap between BIC conceptualizations and children’s position within post-separation family arrangements.