Why individual escalations do not replace an overall prognosis
Alternating custody is not automatic in Switzerland nor a privilege of one parent. The decisive factor is the child’s best interests. If a parent or the child requests shared care in the case of joint parental custody, the court must examine the possibility of such an arrangement based on the concrete circumstances.
Recurring criteria in the Federal Court’s case-law include the parental capacity of both parents, their ability to communicate and cooperate on child-related matters, the geographical situation, previous care arrangements, stability, the child’s age, sibling relationships and the social environment. Communication can also take place in writing; mediation by third parties does not preclude alternating custody.
Particularly important: A parent's mere opposition to joint custody does not by itself prove a lack of ability to cooperate. What matters is whether a serious parental conflict also affects other matters concerning the child such that the custody arrangement is manifestly burdensome for the child. Therefore, a court should not merely establish that a conflict exists, but should examine its concrete characteristics, causes and effects on the child.
That a parent impedes communication, withholds information or blocks care arrangements must be assessed in a gender-neutral manner. Such behaviours may be relevant for 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 the care that each parent can actually provide, how handovers are organized, how school and medical matters are coordinated, and which solution offers the child long-term stability and viable 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.
Further posts
Editorial specialist article. Not individual legal advice. Prior to publication, the state of legislation and case law and the sources must be checked again.