mytest
Books, eBooks, and more from Debito Arudou, Ph.D. (click on icon):
UPDATES ON TWITTER: arudoudebito
DEBITO.ORG PODCASTS on iTunes, subscribe free
“LIKE” US on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/debitoorg
https://www.facebook.com/embeddedrcsmJapan
http://www.facebook.com/handbookimmigrants
https://www.facebook.com/JapaneseOnlyTheBook
https://www.facebook.com/BookInAppropriate
If you like what you read and discuss on Debito.org, please consider helping us stop hackers and defray maintenance costs with a little donation via my webhoster:
All donations go towards website costs only. Thanks for your support!
Hi Blog. An important law was just effected this month — both parents are now allowed access to their kids after a divorce. It’s in my view good news, even if it comes a good 25 years too late for our generation of parents who lost their kids in a Japanese divorce. May future generations never know what we all went through in our day, and may there be less misery inflicted on children just because the parents couldn’t work it out. Debito Arudou, Ph.D.
/////////////////////////////////////////////
What you need to know about Japan’s new joint custody system
Advocates say that the changes will allow both parents to remain involved in the raising of their children
BY JESSICA SPEED. Japan Times, Mar 24, 2026
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2026/03/24/japan/society/explainer-joint-custody/
Joint custody for divorced parents will be allowed from April 1 in Japan — one of the few jurisdictions in the world where custody has been granted to only one parent — in one of the biggest reforms to the country’s family law in decades.
For the first time ever, revisions to the Civil Code and related laws will allow parents to choose between sole custody or joint custody following a divorce. The Justice Ministry says the reform is aimed at placing “the best interests of the child” at the center of post-divorce arrangements.
Until now, sole custody was the only option a divorced couple had, in contrast with many Western countries where joint custody is commonplace. The system has long drawn criticism from foreign organizations — particularly in cases involving international marriages and cross-border custody disputes — because it robs the noncustodial parent from having any legal authority over major life decisions for the child.
Advocates say that the changes will allow both parents to remain involved in the raising of their children. However, critics warn that it could expose abuse victims to continued control by their former spouses and effectively cut off their only route of escape.
Others say it places too much power in the hands of the family court, which decides whether or not to grant joint custody if the divorcing parents can’t come to an agreement on their own.
Other revisions to legislation include allowing trial visitation periods and having clearer procedures for the seizing of assets for a parent’s nonpayment of child support.
Here’s what you need to know about the changes that take effect from April 1:
What is going to change and how is joint custody decided?
Under Japan’s current system, only one parent can hold parental authority after a divorce. The mother was granted custody for 85% of divorce cases in 2020, according to the latest available data from the health ministry.
However, from April, divorcing couples can decide whether parental authority will be shared by both parents or held by one parent alone. If they cannot come to an agreement, or if the divorce is decided in the family court, a judge will determine whether joint or sole custody is in the child’s best interests.
The amendment does not create a general presumption in favor of either arrangement.
The court is expected to decide on a case-by-case basis, based on the child’s welfare, the relationship between each parent and the child, and the relationship between the parents, among other factors.
Disagreement between parents over custody does not automatically rule out the possibility of joint custody. But in high-conflict divorce cases, the court may still award sole custody if it finds that the parents would have difficulty exercising parental authority together.
What kind of authority would joint custody entail?
In principle, a child’s major life decisions — such as where they live, what school they go to, what major medical procedures they undergo, and what assets they hold — are to be made with both parents’ consent.
If parents cannot agree on a specific issue, the family court can designate one parent to decide on the matter alone.
The law also allows one parent to act independently on matters described as “daily decisions related to custody and education.”
These include things such as food, routine vaccinations and extracurricular activities, as well as participation in ordinary school events, part-time jobs for high schoolers, as well as short sightseeing trips.
One parent may still make major decisions alone in urgent circumstances. These include moving to escape domestic violence or abuse, giving the go-ahead for emergency medical treatments, and deciding on schools when enrollment deadlines are approaching.
Additionally, the joint exercise of parental authority does not necessarily mean both parents’ signatures or seals are always required in consent forms. One parent may often act as the only signee, with the other parent’s consent being implied.
If one parent seeks consultation on a matter requiring joint decision-making and the other parent does not respond within a “reasonable period,” that silence may in some circumstances be treated as implicit consent.
Under what circumstances would sole custody be granted?
The family court cannot grant joint custody if there is a risk that a parent will harm the child physically or mentally, or if domestic violence or other circumstances make joint decision-making difficult.
Courts will consider whether there is violence or a risk of violence between parents, rather than requiring proof of past physical abuse, such as a doctor’s note.
The Justice Ministry says this is not limited to evidence of physical violence. Emotional, financial and sexual abuse may also be relevant, although this may be trickier to prove, critics have warned.
For the court to judge whether there is a risk of physical violence, physical evidence from a third party, such as a doctor’s note, will not be required.
Can divorced couples switch to joint custody after sole custody has been granted?
Yes. Parents who divorced before the law takes effect will also be able to apply to change an existing sole custody arrangement after April 1.
The family court will decide whether to change the arrangement based on the child’s best interests. The ministry says this process also applies to custody agreements reached under improper circumstances, including domestic violence.
Upon applying for the change, the court can see as part of its assessment whether a parent has fulfilled their responsibilities, such as paying child support and whether they have complied with their duty to respect and cooperate with the other parent.
Examples of conduct that may violate this obligation include violence toward the other parent, refusing to allow the child to meet with the other parent despite set agreements, and overinterference in the other parent’s parenting of the child.
What are the pros and cons of the new system?
Supporters of the reform say allowing joint custody could help children maintain meaningful relationships with both parents after divorce.
But opponents warn the new framework could make it harder for victims of domestic violence to sever ties with abusive former partners, potentially forcing sustained interaction long after a relationship has ended.
Yet the reality of divorce rarely falls neatly into either camp.
Steve H., an English teacher in Yamagata Prefecture who asked for his surname to be redacted, said the current system can leave a noncustodial parent powerless even when a child’s welfare is at stake.
He pointed to an example involving his daughter, who lives with her mother, who had a broken baby tooth that had decayed. Her mother refused to have it treated, he said, even though his daughter was clearly embarrassed by it.
Joint custody, he said, would have allowed him to have her get treatment.
For him, that case showed how sole custody can leave one parent watching from the sidelines even over basic issues such as a child’s medical care.
However, there is also another side to consider.
He said his son, who lives with him, doesn’t have a good relationship with his mother and “wants absolutely nothing to do with her.” He fears joint custody could give her more access.
“No joint custody means my son and I are free right now,” he said.
The Justice Ministry has stressed that the revised law is not meant to force cooperation where cooperation is impossible, particularly in cases involving domestic violence.
Still, much will depend on how the family court interprets the legal provisions.
The amendments allow joint custody, but leave judges with broad discretion in determining what arrangements serve the child’s best interests. As a result, the reform’s real impact may depend less on the wording of the law itself, and more on how the court applies it in practice.
That uncertainty is compounded by the broader context of divorce in Japan. Unlike in many Western countries, divorce still carries social stigma, and couples who reach that point are often doing so after relationships have already severely broken down.
Whether the new system will encourage greater parental cooperation — or simply create new arenas for conflict — may only become clear once the family court begins applying the revised laws to real-life cases.
ENDS
======================
Do you like what you read on Debito.org? Want to help keep the archive active and support Debito.org’s activities? Please consider donating a little something. More details here. Or if you prefer something less complicated, just click on an advertisement below.