Conflict dynamics instead of gender stereotypes
Alternating custody is not automatic in Switzerland and not a privilege of one parent. The decisive factor is the child's best interests. If a parent or the child requests shared care in cases of joint parental authority, the court must examine its feasibility based on 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 geographic situation, the previous caregiving, stability, the child’s age, sibling relationships and the social environment. Communication may 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 ability or willingness to cooperate. What is decisive is whether a serious parental conflict also affects other matters concerning the child to such an extent that the custody arrangement clearly burdens the child. Therefore, a court should not merely establish that a conflict exists, but examine its specific manifestations, causes and effects on the child.
That a parent impedes communication, withholds information or obstructs care arrangements must be assessed in a gender-neutral manner. Such behaviors may be relevant for the prognosis, but must not be attributed categorically to the mother or the father. Statements must refer to concrete, verifiable incidents.
For a balanced decision, it is therefore necessary to compare what caregiving each parent can actually provide, how handovers are organised, how school and medical matters are coordinated, and which solution will provide the child with long-term stability and sustainable relationships with both parents.
Case law:BGE 142 III 612; BGE 142 III 617; Federal Supreme Court 5A_748/2022 of 9 February 2023; 5A_195/2024 of 9 October 2024; 5A_102/2025 of 20 March 2026.
Related posts
Editorial specialist article. Not individual legal advice. Before publication, the status of laws and case law as well as the sources must be checked again.