I have a "friend" that does not meet the dictionary definition of a friend. In fact, it is quite ironic that I, or anyone else in a similar situation, would refer to this person as a friend.
What is even stranger yet is that I have never met this person, nor have I ever spoken to him. Truth be told, this person is not so much my friend as much as he is "friend of the court."
Our friendship, or better yet dictatorship, is a product of my parents' divorce. Any couple who has children, and is seeking a divorce, is appointed a Friend of the Court. If the parents don't work it out, the Friend of the Court determines the amount of time children spend with each parent.
This can be problematic. Despite the court's intentions to act in the best interest of the children, I, not unlike many other children of divorced families, have never met the friend who dictates with whom and when I will spend my time.
Fortunately, my family's divorce was a battle in comparison to the wars that failed marriages create. Once I was older, not all decisions were left for the court to decide, and I had a flexible visiting schedule.
Unfortunately, this is not what countless children in divorced families experience. Instead, they are held captive by their parents' inability to compromise. What many do not see is that a war being placated by a third party usually ends up with friendly fire casualties: the kids.
Theoretically, ending a marriage creates a healthier living environment for both the parents and kids. This is, however, not possible when the heat of battle allows a stranger to make decisions for the parents because of their inability to compromise. Although it may seem wise to mediate between arguing spouses in order to establish a stable living arrangement, the court system is often flawed.
Because children rarely meet with the Friend of the Court to voice concerns or feelings, it is often decided that both parents will have custody or visitation. Even after long absences where a parent has neglected to see his or her kids, the option to resume contact is still there.
Too often, a parent will choose to forfeit visitation and decide to reenter the lives of the children after an extended period of time as a stranger, not a trusted parent. If the children feel uncomfortable and refuse to go, the other parent is in contempt of court and can be put in jail.
I, a prisoner of war, have never refused to visit a parent, nor have I ever disregarded a visitation schedule set by the Friend of the Court. My loss of freedom has allowed both of my parents a jail-free life and entitled me to holidays spent traveling, moving every couple of weeks and daily negotiations between enemies.
The worst, I must admit, is the holiday road trips. Instead of a leisurely day with relatives, I must drive several hours Christmas Eve, and day, to ensure that both parties have their fair share with the kids. Instead of looking forward to a holiday, I can only find myself bitter that I am being passed around like gravy.
Allowing a "friend" to make the important decisions in a divorce neglects the invisible soldiers in the war. Family and divorce situations vary, but being a kid in a divorced family does not.
I, and every other young person in my situation, must live life according to a stranger's idea of what is best. The divorce system and third party decisions are flawed. Less power should go to the judge and Friend of the Court, and, instead, be given to the kids involved.
It should be remembered that we were drafted for this battle.
We did not sign up for this war.
Sarah Harfst is a senior at Elk Rapids High School.
Print this story
E-mail this story
