Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Parental Separation or Divorce, Shared Parenting Time Arrangements, and Child Well-Being: New Findings for Canada

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Canadian Studies in Population Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In recent years, a lack of relevant contemporary Canadian data sources has led to a gap in our understanding of the experience of parental separation or divorce among children. Using the 2019 Canadian Health Survey on Children and Youth, we aim to update our understanding of this topic. Through cross-sectional analysis, we estimate the prevalence of the experience of parental breakup among children and describe the characteristics that correlate with this experience. Among children who have experienced parental breakup, we detail the prevalence of various types of parenting time arrangements as measured through the type of contact with the other parent not living in the surveyed household (equal, regular, irregular, remote only, none). Finally, a series of logistic regressions are employed to estimate the differential probability of children exhibiting mental health or functional difficulties according to (a) having experienced parental separation or divorce and (b) their subsequent type of contact with the other parent. Findings indicate that 18% of children aged 1–17 in Canada in 2019 had experienced the separation or divorce of their parents. The most common subsequent parenting time arrangement was to have regular visits with the other parent. Children who had experienced parental breakup were found to have significantly higher odds of exhibiting mental health or functional difficulties. Following parental breakup, the relative odds of having mental health or functional difficulties was highest among children who had irregular contact with the other parent.

Dans les dernières années, le manque de données canadiennes contemporaines et pertinentes a nui à notre compréhension de l’expérience de la séparation ou du divorce des parents chez les enfants. En utilisant l’Enquête canadienne sur la santé des enfants et des jeunes de 2019, notre objectif est de mettre à jour notre compréhension de ce sujet. Grâce à des analyses transversales, nous estimons la prévalence de l’expérience de la rupture parentale chez les enfants et décrivons les caractéristiques qui sont corrélées avec cette expérience. Parmi les enfants qui ont vécu une rupture parentale, nous détaillons la prévalence de divers types d’arrangements du temps parental, mesurés par le type de contact avec l’autre parent ne vivant pas dans le ménage enquêté (égal, régulier, irrégulier, à distance seulement, aucun). Enfin, une série de régressions logistiques est utilisée pour estimer la probabilité différentielle que les enfants présentent des problèmes de santé mentale ou des difficultés fonctionnelles selon (a) qu’ils ont vécu la séparation ou le divorce de leurs parents et (b) le type de contact qu’ils ont eu avec l’autre parent par la suite. Les résultats indiquent que 18% des enfants âgés de 1 à 17 ans au Canada en 2019 avaient vécu la séparation ou le divorce de leurs parents. L’arrangement de temps parental le plus courant par la suite était d’avoir des visites régulières avec l’autre parent. On a constaté que les enfants qui avaient vécu une rupture parentale avaient significativement plus de chances de présenter des difficultés de santé mentale ou fonctionnelles. Après une rupture parentale, les enfants qui avaient des contacts irréguliers avec l’autre parent étaient les plus susceptibles d’avoir des problèmes de santé mentale ou des difficultés fonctionnelles.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The data are available in Statistics Canada Research Data Centres and accessible to those with approved projects. See https://crdcn.org/research to make an application.

The SAS programs used to compute estimates are available from the authors upon request.

Notes

  1. In this article, the “other parent” refers to the child’s other parent or guardian who is not a member of the surveyed household.

  2. Status as of the time of submission of this article. Statistics Canada has recently undertaken a pilot project to produce key indicators of annual divorce flows for Canada, provinces and territories.

  3. The share of couples that were common law in Canada increased from 5.6% in 1981 (Statistics Canada, 2012) to 21.3% in 2016 (Statistics Canada, 2017b).

  4. The census does not collect information on whether an individual has separated from a common-law union.

  5. In addition to the fact that divorces represent only a fraction of all parental breakups, an increasing share of ex-spouses utilize informal parenting arrangements (Sinha, 2014). The Department of Justice Canada’s Survey of Family Courts collects partial data on custodial outcomes, only from Divorce files, and only from a limited number of courts. Statistics Canada’s Civil Court Survey collects information on the nature of judgments in civil court related to legal custody decisions and physical custody decisions; the survey does not yet have full coverage of all jurisdictions.

  6. As described by Sinha (2014): ‘Generally speaking, parenting plans identify the living arrangements of the child, the time each parent spends with the child, and the decision-making responsibilities of parents on matters such as schooling, religion and medical care. It may be an informal arrangement, or one that is formalized in writing in an arrangement or court order, either by the parents themselves or through a lawyer, family justice service or a judge’.

  7. This arrangement is often referred to in the literature as ‘shared custody’ or ‘joint custody’. Canada is currently in a period of substantial transition with respect to legal terminology related to this topic. Following amendments in 2021 to the Divorce Act, terms such as ‘joint physical custody’ and ‘access’ are no longer used by the Department of Justice Canada (Department of Justice Canada, 2021a). Instead, the term ‘shared parenting time’ is suggested (Department of Justice Canada, 2021b); thus, we use this term in the present article. That said, this term does not always lend itself well to studies such as this one in which the unit of analysis is the child. Pelletier (2017) utilizes the term ‘dual residence’, which clearly indicates the unit of the analysis is the child and that the outcome of interest is the child’s residential situation; however, there is a risk that this term could be mistaken by a general audience as referring to the holding of residence permits in two countries.

  8. The most recent 2017 GSS Family cycle collected information on parenting time among separated or divorced persons with at least one dependent child according to various measures with respect to the reference period, the experience being asked about, and the frequency of that experience (Statistics Canada, n.d.). For the purposes of determining eligibility for the Canada Child Benefit, the Canada Revenue Agency asks tax-filers to indicate whether a child lives ‘about equally between both parents’, ‘mostly with you’, or ‘mostly with the other parent’, with no further specification (Canada Revenue Agency, n.d). The demarcation of what cut point, in terms of the proportion of the child’s time spent living with each parent, should be used to demarcate shared parenting appears to be undecided in the international literature, ranging anywhere from 25% (Steinbach, 2019), 30% (Baude et al., 2016) or 30 to 35% (Kline Pruett & DiFonzo, 2014), while in Canada, 40% is the criterion utilized in federal courts when establishing child support payments (Department of Justice Canada, 2021b).

  9. As announced in Finance Canada’s 2018 Budget (Department of Finance Canada, 2018). The province of Quebec has had dedicated second parent leave since 2006.

  10. From the initial frame of the Canada Child Benefit, initial weights are calculated for each sampled child. These weights undergo several adjustments, including for non-response and calibration to known population totals, to create the final weights. For more information on the collection process, response rate evaluation, and processing procedures of the CHSCY, see https://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb/p2SV.pl?Function=getSurvey&SDDS=5233#a3

  11. Foster children are in theory excluded from the sample because the sampling frame is the Canada Child Benefit (CC) file; foster families do not receive the CCB. However, relationship possibilities within the household nonetheless include ‘foster parent’ in cases that the selected child is residing in a foster home at the time the survey is sent (and the foster family was forwarded the survey invitation). Given that the filtering criteria (i.e., the survey question ‘has this child experienced the separation or divorce of a parent?’) do not specify the adoptive/biological nature of the parent–child relationship, it was decided to remove adopted children from the analysis of type of contact with the other parent. Since it was not possible to distinguish children who had experienced the death of a parent (which would influence type of contact with said parent) versus the death of a sibling (which would not), these children were removed from the analytical subsample examining type of contact.

  12. Rural areas were defined based on population concentration and density per square kilometre, and proximity to core areas (Statistics Canada, 2020b).

  13. On November 27, 2006, the House of Commons in Ottawa adopted a motion on recognition of the Quebec nation ‘That this House recognize that the Québécois form a nation within a united Canada’. In 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada referred to the existence of ‘Quebec’s distinct legal traditions and social values’. Reference re Supreme Court Act, ss. 5 and 6, 2014 SCC 21, para. 49. https://www.sqrc.gouv.qc.ca/relations-canadiennes/institutions-constitution/statut-qc/reconnaisance-nation-en.asp

  14. Collège d’enseignement général et professionnel (Quebec only).

  15. The responding parent was instructed to exclude visits to the other parents’ household in the context of shared parenting time.

  16. No distinction is specified with respect to whether the siblings are biological, adopted, half of step.

  17. Sensitivity analyses tested an alternative dichotomization of ‘excellent/very good/good’ vs. ‘fair/poor’. Regression coefficients were similar to the ultimate derived variable but were less robust likely owing to the significantly smaller number of cases.

References

  • Bala, N., Birnbaum, R., Poitras, K., Sain, M., Cyr, F., & LeClair, S. (2017). Shared parenting in Canada: Increasing use but continued controversy. Family Court Review, 55(4), 513–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baude, A., Pearson, J., & Drapeau, S. (2016). Child adjustment in joint physical custody versus sole custody: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 57(5), 338–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaujot, R., Du Jiangqin, C., & Ravanera, Z. (2013). Family policies in Quebec and the rest of Canada: Implications for fertility, child-care, women’s paid work, and child development indicators. Canadian Public Policy, 39(2), 221–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beiser, M., Hou, F., Hyman, I., & Tousignant, M. (2002). Poverty, family process, and the mental health of immigrant children in Canada. American Journal of Public Health, 92, 220–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bérard-Chagnon, J., Laflamme, N., & Ménard, F-P. (n.d.). (external publication forthcoming). Examining the consistency of de facto marital status between tax data and the 2016 Census. Statistics Canada internal report (unpublished)

  • Bjarnason, T., & Arnarsson, A. M. (2011). Joint physical custody and communication with parents: A cross-national study of children in 36 western countries. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 42(6), 871–890.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohnert, N., Milan, A., & Lathe, H. (2014). Enduring diversity: Living arrangements of children in Canada over 100 years of the census. Demographic Documents, Statistics Canada catalogue no. 91F0015M–No. 11.

  • Braver, S.K., & Votruba, A.M. (2021). Does joint physical custody “cause” children’s better outcomes? In J.M. de Torres Perea, E. Kruk & M. Ortiz-Tallo (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of shared parenting and best interest of the child (pp. 63–77). Imprint Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003140566

  • Canadian Paediatric Society (2013). Position statement: Supporting the mental health of children and youth of separating parents https://cps.ca/en/documents/position/%20mental-health-children-and-youth-of-separating-parents

  • Canada Revenue Agency (no date). Canada child benefit: Who can apply.https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/child-family-benefits/canada-child-benefit-overview/canada-child-benefit-before-you-apply.html#primary

  • Corak, M. (2001). Death and divorce: The long-term consequences of parental loss on adolescents. Journal of Labor Economics, 19(3), 682–715.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coulter, R., van Ham, M., & Findlay, A. M. (2016). Re-thinking residential mobility: Linking lives through time and space. Progress in Human Geography, 40(3), 352–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department of Finance Canada (2018). Budget plan: Equality + growth: A strong middle class. February 27, 2018. https://www.budget.gc.ca/2018/docs/plan/toc-tdm-en.html

  • Department of Justice Canada (2021a). The Divorce Act changes explained http://bit.ly/3nG5Up0

  • Department of Justice Canada (2021b). “Section 4: What is the best parenting arrangement for my child?” Making plans: A guide to parenting arrangements after separation or divorce. https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/fl-df/parent/mp-fdp/p5.html

  • de Torres Perea, J.M. (2021). Recent developments in shared parenting in western countries. In J.M. de Torres Perea, E. Kruk & M. Ortiz-Tallo (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of shared parenting and best interest of the child (pp. 355–369). Imprint Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003140566

  • Ferrer, A., & Pan, Y. (2020). Divorce, remarriage and child cognitive outcomes: Evidence from Canadian longitudinal data of children. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 61(8), 636–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fomby, P., & Cherlin, A. J. (2007). Family instability and child well-being. American Sociological Review, 72(2), 181–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fomby, P., Ophir, A., & Carlson, M. J. (2021). Family complexity and children’s behavior problems over two U.S. cohorts. Journal of Marriage and Family, 83, 340–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fostik, A., & Le Bourdais, C. (2020). Regional variations in multiple-partner fertility in Canada. Canadian Studies in Population, 47(1), 73–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gopalkrishnan, N. (2018). Cultural diversity and mental health: Considerations for policy and practice. Frontiers in Public Health, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00179

  • Hwang, W.-C., Myers, H. F., Abe-Kim, J., & Ting, J. Y. (2008). A conceptual paradigm for understanding culture’s impact on mental health: The cultural influences on mental health (CIMH) model. Clinical Psychology Review, 28(2), 211–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Juby, H., Marcil-Gratton, N., & Le Bourdais, C. (2004). When parents separate: Further findings from the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth. Department of Justice Canada Research Report 2004-FCY-6E 2004.

  • Juby, H., Le Bourdais, C., & Marcil-Gratton, N. (2005). Sharing roles, sharing custody? Couples’ characteristics and children’s living arrangements at separation. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 157–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitterod, R., & Lyngstad, J. (2012). Untraditional caring arrangements among parents living apart: the case of Norway. Demographic Research, 27(5), 121–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kline Pruett, M., & DiFonzo, J. H. (2014). Closing the gap: Research, policy, practice and shared parenting. Family Court Review, 52(152), 152–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kline Pruett, M., McIntosh, J. E., & Kelly, J. B. (2014). Parental separation and overnight care of young children, part 1: Consensus through theoretical and empirical integration. Family Court Review, 52(2), 241–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koster, T., & Castro-Martin, T. (2021). Are separated fathers less or more involved in childrearing than partnered fathers? European Journal of Population, 37, 933–957.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koster, T., Poortman, A.-R., van der Lippe, T., & Kleingeld, P. (2021). Parenting in postdivorce families: the influence of residence, repartnering, and gender. Journal of Marriage and Family, 83(2), 498–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laplante, B. (2016). A matter of norms: Family background, religion, and generational change in the diffusion of first union breakdown among French-speaking Quebeckers. Demographic Research, 35(27), 785–812.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, D., & McLanahan, S. (2015). Family structure transitions and child development: Instability, selection and population heterogeneity. American Sociological Review, 80(4), 738–763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lesthaeghe, R. (2020). The second demographic transition, 1986–2020: Sub-replacement fertility and rising cohabitation – a global update. Journal of Population Sciences 76(10). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41118-020-00077-4

  • Letablier, M.T., & Wall, K. (2018). Changing lone parenthood patterns: New challenges for policy and research. In L. Bernardi & D. Mortelmans (Eds.), Lone parenthood in the life course. Life Course Research and Social Policise, vol 8. Spring, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63295-7_2

  • Loeb, M., Cappa, C., Crialesi, R., & de Palma, E. (2017). Measuring child functioning: the Unicef/Washington Group Module. Salud Publica de México, 59(4). https://doi.org/10.21149/8962

  • Lopez-Carmen, V., McCalman, J., Benveniste, T., Askew, D., Spurling, G., Langham, E., & Bainbridge, R. (2019). Working together to improve the mental health of Indigenous children: A systematic review. Children and Youth Services Review, 104, 104408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lopez Narbona, A.M., Moreno Minguez, A., & Ortega Gaspar, M. (2021). Family structure, parental practices and child wellbeing in postdivorce situations. In J.M. de Torres Perea, E. Kruk & M. Ortiz-Tallo (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of shared parenting and best interest of the child (pp 170–182). Imprint Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003140566

  • Mandemakers, J. J., & Kalmijn, M. (2014). Do mother’s and father’s education condition the impact of parental divorce on child well-being? Social Science Research, 44, 187–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manning, W. D., & Smock, P. J. (2000). ‘Swapping’ families: Serial parenting and economic support for children. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(1), 111–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marcil-Gratton, N., & Le Bourdais, C. (1999). Custody, access and child support: Findings from the National Longitudinal Study of Children and Youth. Department of Justice Canada.

  • Margolis, R., Choi, Y., Hou, F., & Haan, M. (2019). Capturing trends in Canadian divorce in an era without vital statistics. Demographic Research, 41(52), 1453–1478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLanahan, S. (2004). Diverging destinies: How children are faring under the second demographic transition. Demography, 41, 607–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLanahan, S., & Jacobsen, W. (2015). Diverging destinies revisited. In P.R. Amato et al. (eds.), Families in an era of increasing inequality (pp 3–23), National Symposium on Family Issues 5. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08308-7_1

  • Merikangas, K. R., Nakamura, E. F., & Kessler, R. C. (2009). Epidemiology of mental disorders in children and adolescents. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 11, 7–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, L. (2014). Shared physical custody: Summary of 40 studies on outcomes for children. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 55, 614–636.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, L. (2018). Joint versus sole physical custody: Children’s outcomes independent of parent-child relationships, income and conflict in 60 studies. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 59(4), 247–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, L. (2021). Joint versus sole physical custody: Which is best for children? In J.M. de Torres Perea, E. Kruk & M. Ortiz-Tallo (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of shared parenting and best interest of the child (pp 40–50). Imprint Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003140566

  • Palmer, S. E. (2002). Custody and access issues with children whose parents are separated or divorced. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 4(Suppl), 25–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pelletier, D. (2016). The diffusion of cohabitation and children’s risks of family dissolution in Canada. Demographic Research, 35(45), 1317–1342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pelletier, D. (2017). Combien d’enfants en double résidence ou en garde partagée ? Sources et mesures dans les contextes québécois et canadien. Cahiers Québécois De Démographie, 46(1), 101–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pelletier, D., Lardoux, S., & Onadja, Y. (2017). Avec qui les enfants vont-ils vivre ? Facteurs associés au partage du temps parental lors d’une séparation. Cahiers De Recherche Sociologique, 63, 85–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ram, B., & Hou, F. (2003). Changes in family structure and child outcomes: Roles of economic and family resources. Policy Studies Journal, 31(3), 309–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reiss, F. (2013). Socioeconomic inequalities and mental health problems in children and adolescents: A systematic review. Social Science and Medicine, 90, 24–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinha, M. (2014). Parenting and child support after separation or divorce. Spotlight on Canadians: Results from the general social survey, Statistics Canada catalogue no. 89–652.

  • Statistics Canada (2012). Fifty years of families in Canada: 1961 to 2011. Census in Brief. Catalogue no. 98–312-X2011003.

  • Statistics Canada (2015). Weighted estimation and bootstrap variance estimation for analyzing survey data: How to implement in selected software. The Research Data Centres Information and Technical Bulletin. Statistics Canada catalogue no. 12–002-X.

  • Statistics Canada (2017a). Portrait of children’s family life in Canada in 2016. Census in Brief. Catalogue no. 98–200-X2016006.

  • Statistics Canada (2017b). Families, households and marital status: Key results from the 2016 Census. The Daily. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/170802/dq170802a-eng.htm

  • Statistics Canada (2019a). Family matters: Being separated or divorced in Canada. Catalogue no. 11–627-M.

  • Statistics Canada (2019b). Family matters: New relationships after separation or divorce. Catalogue no. 11–627-M.

  • Statistics Canada (2020a). Family matters: Family ties: How often do adult children see their parents? Catalogue no. 11–627-M.

  • Statistics Canada. (2020b). Canadian Health Survey on Children and Youth (CHSCY): Derived variables specifications. Statistics Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Statistics Canada (2021a). Contact with children after divorce or separation. The Daily, November 28, 2021a.

  • Statistics Canada (2021b). Low income measure (LIM) thresholds by income source and household size. Statistics Canada Table 11–10–0232–01. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1110023301

  • Statistics Canada (n.d.). General Social Survey C31 Questionnaire. https://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb/p3Instr.pl?Function=assembleInstr&lang=en&Item_Id=335815

  • Steinbach, A. (2019). Children’s and parents’ well-being in joint physical custody: A literature review. Family Process, 58(2), 353–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinbach, A., & Augustijn, L. (2021). Post-separation parenting time schedules in joint physical custody arrangements. Journal of Marriage and Family, 83(2), 595–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strohschein, L. (2005). Parental divorce and child mental health trajectories. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(5), 1286–1300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strohschein, L. (2012). Parental divorce and child mental health: Accounting for predisruption differences. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 53(6), 489–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strohschein, L. (2017). Non-residential fatherhood in Canada. Canadian Studies in Population, 44(1–2), 16–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, E., & McLanahan, S. S. (2012). Reflections on “Family structure and child well-being: Economic resources vs. parental socialization.” Social Forces, 91(1), 45–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vezzetti, V.C. (2021). Shared parenting as a protective factor in children’s and adults’ health. In J.M. de Torres Perea, E. Kruk & M. Ortiz-Tallo (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of shared parenting and best interest of the child (pp 142–154). Imprint Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003140566

  • Waldfogel, J., Craigie, T.-A., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2010). Fragile families and child wellbeing. Future of Children, 20(2), 87–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, C., Hanson, C., Craig, J. C., Clapham, K., & Williamson, A. (2017). Psychosocial factors associated with the mental health of Indigenous children living in high income countries: A systematic review. International Journal for Equity in Health, 16, 153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Some of the descriptive statistics presented in this article were previously published in the 2021 Statistics Canada infographic ‘How many children in Canada have experienced the separation or divorce of their parents?’. The authors would like to thank Leanne Findlay, Nicole Aitken, David Pelletier, Anne Milan, Ana Fostik, Pascale Beaupré, Evelyne Morrissette, Claudine Provencher, Laurent Martel, Dafna Kohen, the two anonymous reviewers, and the editors for their valuable comments in regard to this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Demography, Statistics Canada, Ottawa, Canada

    Nora Galbraith

  2. Health Analysis Division, Statistics Canada, Ottawa, Canada

    Mila Kingsbury

Authors
  1. Nora Galbraith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mila Kingsbury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Not applicable.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nora Galbraith.

Ethics declarations

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the authors. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of Statistics Canada.

Competing Interests

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Galbraith, N., Kingsbury, M. Parental Separation or Divorce, Shared Parenting Time Arrangements, and Child Well-Being: New Findings for Canada. Can. Stud. Popul. 49, 75–108 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42650-022-00068-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42650-022-00068-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation