Cochem Practice: 1992–Present
Jürgen Karl Rudolf is one of the founders of the Cochem Practice in 1992. In his speech (available via the link above), the following key ideas are essential for understanding the motivation behind its creation. What you should especially pay attention to is highlighted in bold:
Why the need for the so-called Cochem Practice arose:
"When parents were separating, the judge asked who had caused the breakup. The one who was identified as the "guilty party" could not be granted custody of the child. It was like the Middle Ages."
Principles of the Cochem Practice:
In 1992, we reached an agreement among all involved professions. We agreed to share our perspectives, professional backgrounds, working principles, and education. Our joint mission would be to look at the situation through the eyes of the child — not through the interests of the parents. We want to find out what is best for children, because we have expertise across professions.
We established clear rules for mutual cooperation:
- The judge must schedule a hearing no later than within two weeks.
- Lawyers must describe the situation on one page — no more. Lawyers representing the other parent must not respond.
- Child protection workers must speak with the children. They must speak with both parents — in person, in real life, not by phone or email.
We want to understand the real relationship between the child and the parents, so we can support the child's relationship with both parents.
Mr. Rudolf highlights the following insights from practice:
It was a beneficial situation for children, parents, and professionals. Psychologists helped parents focus on the needs of the child. Forensic experts examined what happens to a child when a family breaks apart — conclusion: children do not wish for separation, unless we are talking about cases of violence or abuse, i.e. highly conflictual situations.
Every child has two parents — one is like this, the other is different. Forget diagnoses. The judge has the opportunity to work with the parents so that the child does not lose one of them. All professions must provide counseling if the court refers parents to them.
We meet once a month — lawyers, experts, judges, child protection workers, counselors.
The meeting has three parts:
- What's new — Supreme Court decisions, developments in society.
- Supervision and critique.
- Education.
Statement from lawyers: "We are no longer enemies." They were the first profession to agree with this practice.
Statement from judges and politicians: "What you're doing is not written in the law." Mr. Rudolf: That's true — but no law forbids it. It is a practice that looks through the eyes of the child.
One day we said to ourselves: This must become law. It must become an obligation. We were surprised by the success — even abroad. I know that Slovakia adopted a law that works similarly to the Cochem model. It was a great success — beneficial for children, parents, professionals, and institutions.
What does the Cochem practice advocate and how does it achieve it?
It advocates for:
- Equal rights for both the mother and the father to raise the child. But where is the child's right to experience childhood in love, happiness, and understanding? It is not true that every parent inherently possesses love and understanding, and that the child experiences love, happiness, and understanding with him.
How does it achieve this?
- Professionals (judges, lawyers, child protection workers, psychologists, experts) are in agreement – they support the child's relationship with both parents – in other words, they strongly push for both parents to be involved in caregiving.
- The judge has the opportunity to work with the parents so that the child does not lose one of them.