UCSC Currents online

Front Page
Accolades Classified Ads
In Memoriam Opinion Take Note

May 8, 2000

Elian: Behind the captured smile

By Donald T. Saposnek

Elian is smiling, therefore he is happy. After all, kids are resilient. He'll get over this. Kids get over divorce. Kids get over traumas. His father loves him, so he'll be O.K. Right?

William Safire, in a recent New York Times article, asked "Which Picture Tells the Real Story?," Photo No. 1, showing the terrified child at gunpoint during the rescue effort, or Photo No. 2, showing the smiling Elian in the arms of his father only hours later. This question is a wonderful metaphor for the exquisitely oversimplified polarization that typically takes place on every level in high-conflict child custody disputes. Each side maintains that the child's true happiness lies with them and that any other expressions of happiness are faked or coerced by the other side.

The truth is that, paradoxically, both sides are right. A child's happiness resides not with one side, but with his extrication from the middle of the dispute, and ultimately with a resolution that produces a single integrated life for the child.

Elian's journey as a child of divorce began in Cuba and has been followed by a sequence of life-altering events that have landed him in the middle of an international, front-page, high-conflict child custody dispute. What are the psychological consequences to a child who has gone through so much?

The stress on a young child of even a "good" divorce can be a formidable factor in compromising a child's long-term well-being. However, as you add other unfavorable factors to the mix, the outcomes worsen. Among the numerous variables known to affect a child's outcome from divorce are his predivorce adjustment, his temperament, including the degree of flexibility he exhibits, his ease in handling new situations, his sensitivity threshold, and how his caregivers interact with these temperament characteristics, the custodial parents' psychological adjustment, and the quality of the respective parent-child relationships.

We also know that after one major life trauma, each additional major life trauma has an exponential, not additive, effect on a person. Elian has experienced a lengthy list of traumas since his parents divorced, including a terrifying ride on the open sea, the death of his mother, his rescue and capture by total strangers, an abrupt relocation to a different culture, language, school, and peers, and his sudden and continual exposure to a frenzied media. His recent seizure from the arms of his Miami caregivers by gun-wielding strangers was followed within hours by a reunion with his father (can he trust him this time?), adding yet another breach of emotional attachments to the list that began in Cuba when he left his father, followed by losing his mother, then losing his Miami relatives.

And Elian smiles. He must be happy. Or is he?

Perhaps of even longer lasting emotional impact is Elian's embroilment in the publicly and politically fueled custody dispute between his father and his Miami relatives. Research consistently shows that the more conflict between the child's caregivers, the worse the outcome for the child. Once a child becomes embroiled in a high-conflict custody dispute, several classic phenomena occur, including the development of what has been termed "tribal warfare" that is characterized by the rapid and exaggerated polarization of the disputants, with each gathering up supporters on the respective sides.

This phenomenon has the force of a tornado, spinning and sucking into the fray everyone around . . . friends, families, lawyers, therapists. The sides are drawn and reality is then systematically twisted and distorted into equal and opposite versions of "the truth." As this process unfolds, the concept of truth becomes philosophically trivial as it becomes increasingly elusive and impossible to determine, even by judges and the court.

The dispute is fueled as each side rewrites history, questioning each other's motives, intentions, and very identity, accusing one another of lying, incompetence, and even of being dangerous to the child. Extreme cases breed distorted or even false allegations of abuse and can result in child abduction, homicide, and/or suicide. All intentions are backed by the full and unwavering conviction of self-righteousness.

Invariably, the capacity of caregivers to see the actual needs of the child becomes increasingly compromised as the level of conflict rises. Each caregiver truly believes they are representing the needs and interests of the child. The only problem is that each view is opposite and, as such, incompatible.

Caregivers will often unconsciously (and sometimes very consciously) set up the child to turn against the other caregiver. In this state of being "caught in the middle," the child copes by saying things and behaving in ways that, unwittingly and unintentionally, contribute to the custody dispute, often telling each parent that he wants to live with that parent and not the other. The intention of the child may be to try to please each parent by showing loyalty, or to reunite the parents by forcing them to talk directly with each other, to prevent a parent from becoming angry, or to express any number of other motives. Unfortunately, the parents usually take literally what the child has said and proceed to seek custody through the courts. The effect is to increase the anger and mistrust between parents.

As the dilemma peaks, participants prepare themselves for litigation, but courts have proven their inadequacy in this area. Disputants who "lose" repeatedly appeal for modifications of the court order, thereby prolonging the fight, and, paradoxically, escalating interparental conflict for the child, which, again, is the best predictor of a negative outcome for the child.

Elian's case has transformed tribal warfare into an art form, with the added distortion of sound bites, photo-op snapshots, and competing sociopolitical interests that are sustaining the minute-by-minute, 24/7 media frenzy. The public, the media, and judges have been encouraged to draw conclusions about Elian's response to his ordeal with gross oversimplifications and distortions. Yet we actually know very little about Elian.

But a child's resilience is a complex matter. There are so many factors that go into the mix, including his genetic coping abilities, the degree of predictability and stability of his relationships with caregivers, the extent of the familiarity of routines that are developed and stabilized in his life, and the number of future traumatic situations he will encounter (for which Elian has woefully little reserve).

In fact, Elian will soon face one more trauma. The prospect of his being allowed to represent his own interests in seeking political asylum absurdly flies in the face of what we know about child development. Six-year-old children do not have the cognitive capacity to formulate the meaning of political persecution. Moreover, if Elian were to choose the United States, he would betray his father, an assured formula of psychological disaster for a child.

In the end, we will see how this plays out in the court of politics. Let us hope that sanity prevails.

Donald T. Saposnek teaches psychology at UCSC. A clinical child psychologist and child custody mediator, he is the author of Mediating Child Custody Disputes.


Return to Front Page

  Maintained by pioweb@cats