Assess fathers and mothers by the same criteria
Alternating custody is not automatic in Switzerland and is not the privilege of one parent. The decisive factor is the child’s welfare. If a parent or the child requests shared care in cases of joint parental authority, the court must examine its feasibility on the basis of the concrete circumstances.
Recurring criteria in the Federal Supreme Court’s case law include the parenting ability of both parents, their ability to communicate and cooperate on matters concerning the child, the geographical situation, the prior care arrangements, stability, the child’s age, sibling relationships and the social environment. Communication can also take place in writing; mediation by third parties likewise does not preclude alternating custody.
Particularly important: The mere resistance of one parent to shared custody does not, by itself, prove a lack of cooperative ability. What is decisive is whether a serious parental conflict also affects other matters concerning the child to such an extent that the custody arrangement obviously burdens the child. Therefore, a court should not merely determine that a conflict exists, but should investigate its concrete manifestations, causes and effects on the child.
That a parent impedes communication, withholds information or obstructs caregiving arrangements must be assessed without regard to sex. Such behaviors may be relevant to the prognosis, but must not be attributed categorically to the mother or the father. Statements must be tied to concrete, verifiable incidents.
For a balanced decision, it is therefore necessary to compare which caregiving services both parents can actually provide, how handovers are organized, how school and medical matters are coordinated, and which solution offers the child long-term stability and sustainable relationships with both parents.
Case law: BGE 142 III 612; BGE 142 III 617; Bundesgericht 5A_748/2022 vom 9. Februar 2023; 5A_195/2024 vom 9. Oktober 2024; 5A_102/2025 vom 20. März 2026.
Further articles
Editorial specialist article. Not individual legal advice. Before publication, the legal situation, case law and sources must be checked again.