Collateral Damage: Siblings Torn Apart by Custody Rulings

Siblings share more than a home—they share history, comfort, and a bond that can’t be replicated. Especially during family upheaval, they rely on each other for stability when everything else is changing. And yet, one of the most heartbreaking and overlooked outcomes in family court is the separation of siblings by custody rulings that treat them as individuals on a spreadsheet, rather than a connected unit.

In some cases, siblings are split between households based on age, gender, or perceived “preferences” expressed during rushed evaluations. Other times, separation results from unequal rulings—where one parent is granted custody of one child but deemed unfit for the other. It’s not uncommon for these decisions to be made without any long-term assessment of what such separation will mean for the emotional well-being of the children involved.

Children rarely have the power to advocate for their sibling bond in court. They may not know how to put into words what it feels like to be without their brother or sister. They just know that something critical is missing. They’ve lost their roommate, their secret-keeper, their playmate—the person who understands the family’s dysfunction the way no one else can. In some families, the separation of siblings becomes the deepest wound of all.

The rationale given by the courts often comes down to logistics. “It’s what each parent requested.” “It’s more balanced this way.” “Each child will get individualized attention.” But trauma doesn’t split so neatly. When children are already processing loss, divorce, or instability, forcing them to navigate it without their closest emotional support adds a layer of harm that is rarely acknowledged in rulings.

Even in cases where visitation is shared, siblings may only see each other during brief, structured moments—if at all. They may live entirely different lives under different parenting styles, in different schools, with different routines. Over time, they drift apart—not because they want to, but because the system decided that their bond was less important than convenience or fairness to adults.

The truth is that keeping siblings together isn’t always easy—but it is often essential. Their shared experiences help regulate each other. They provide continuity when everything else feels uncertain. In homes marked by instability or conflict, siblings are the ones who whisper comfort, offer distraction, or simply bear witness to each other’s reality. That bond is not incidental. It is protective.

Family court must stop treating siblings as divisible assets and start recognizing them as relational anchors. Before separating siblings, judges should be required to assess the developmental impact, consult with child psychologists, and seek creative alternatives that prioritize their connection. Sibling unity should be the presumption—not the exception.

Because sometimes, the most important person in a child’s life isn’t a parent. It’s the sibling they were forced to say goodbye to in a courtroom they didn’t understand.