THE CHILD AS AN APPENDIX: ADULTOCENTRISM, CHILDISM[1], AND THE INVISIBILIZATION OF RISK IN FAMILY LAW

Abstract

This study examines the gap between statutory text and judicial practice in Brazilian Family Law, driven by the concern that an adult-centered interpretation of shared custody obscures concrete risks to children’s integrity. Through the theoretical lens of childism, the central question asks to what extent the justice system operates as a guarantor of parents’ subjective rights to the detriment of the child’s absolute protection, thereby failing to recognize the child as a subject in a position of structural vulnerability. Methodologically, the research adopts a qualitative approach based on bibliographic and documentary analysis. It reviews national and international scholarship on adultcentrism and childism, as well as judicial decisions, official reports, and comparative guidelines (Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom) concerning risk assessment and pro-contact presumptions. The focus lies on how rules and decision-making cultures—such as the “maximum contact” principle and the “friendly parent” rule—may operate as interpretative shortcuts that displace the child from the center of adjudication. The findings indicate that risks to children are frequently obscured by moralizing readings of parental conflict, structured skepticism toward allegations, and an automatic preference for contact, even in contexts involving psychological violence and coercive control. The study concludes that full protection requires a paradigmatic shift: contact must not be treated as a trophy or property right, but as a right-duty conditional upon physical and emotional safety. In other words, the non-negotiable limit of any parental arrangement is the child’s integrity—before, not after harm occurs.