When a couple goes through a divorce, there’s usually one thing they both care deeply about — the kids. But when families uncouple, routines change, kids’ rooms change too. Weekends and festivals turn into legalised custody slots. And amid paperwork and court dates, children carry an emotional weight they never really signed up for.
Studies show that a lifestyle that involves travelling between parental households can be challenging for children and lead to an overall decrease in their well-being.
But can you ever shield them from it?
In the West, some couples turn to a co-parenting model called nesting, or birdnesting. Instead of children packing bags and moving between two homes, they stay put in the family house or create a “safe nest” as birds do. It’s the parents who rotate in and out based on a schedule. The idea is simple: if the marriage is ending, the child’s sense of home doesn’t have to.
Why nesting works
Nesting can minimise disruption for children during a period already marked by uncertainty. The biggest advantage? Continuity. How? For the young ones, it all seems a little less broken. When the physicality of their world stays with them, there’s some comfort in the familiarity.
An eight-year-old already struggling with a divorce may feel safer sleeping in the same bed every night. That same school, flat, building, friends, maybe the same watchman whom your kid smiles at on their way to school – these are little anchors of stability.
Dr Devanshi Desai, counselling psychologist and couples therapist, believes nesting can work – but with terms and conditions applied.
“By allowing children to remain in a familiar home, school system, and neighbourhood, parents can preserve continuity, which, according to developmental psychology, is crucial for emotional security,” she explains.
“In my experience, if boundaries are prioritised, communication protocols and logistical conditions are clearly outlined, nesting can be beneficial,” she adds. This is where the importance of communication becomes cardinal. Otherwise, confusion can overpower hope.
Parents may try to sugarcoat the situation, but children often sense the cracks. At the same time, when they see their parents shuttling in and out of the same home, emotional boundaries can blur. The arrangement may unintentionally create hope that things will fall back into place.
“Children appreciate honesty over misinformation. No false hopes should be conveyed. Parents must communicate clearly that the marriage has ended, but co-parenting will continue seamlessly,” Dr Desai explains.
For younger children, nesting may feel stabilising. For teenagers, it can be more complex. Adolescents are already navigating identity shifts and growing social awareness. While some value continuity, others who have witnessed prolonged conflict may prefer a clearer separation over a shared home that still feels tense.
When nesting becomes a bad idea
“Nesting works when the divorce was respectful, mutual, not ugly or hostile. And when both parents are emotionally stable,” Suvarna Varde, a Gurgaon-based couples’ therapist, tells India Today.
“If they cannot sit in one room peacefully for ten minutes, co-parenting will not work. Nesting is impossible.” That line alone captures the crux of the issue. Nesting demands extraordinary emotional discipline at a time when emotions are usually raw.
When parents continue to share a kitchen, belongings, expenses and household responsibilities, boundaries can easily blur, making the arrangement emotionally exhausting for everyone involved. Moreover, healing and moving on require a degree of emotional distance, and nesting can limit that distance.
Can it be a forever arrangement?
In Varde’s view, nesting works best as a temporary, transitional arrangement, perhaps for six months to a year. Beyond that, life tends to complicate things. One parent may remarry, new partners may feel uncomfortable, and old emotional triggers can resurface.
There are financial realities to consider as well. The arrangement often requires maintaining an additional living space for the parent who rotates out. In cities where rents are high and housing is limited, that is no small demand. Over time, living out of a suitcase becomes less symbolic and more real, making long-term sustainability questionable.
Is nesting possible in India?
Varde shares that she has seen it attempted once, by an Indian couple living in the US. It worked for about eight months. The divorce was amicable, the child had an important educational milestone, and the woman’s parents supported the arrangement. What worked for them? The context made it possible.
Indian homes also carry the mixed legacy of joint families. Living together often means constant advice, interference and very little privacy.
According to Varde, nesting in the Indian context is extremely difficult.
Dr Desai adds that divorce still carries stigma in many communities, especially for women. It may not be easy for a newly single woman to feel safe and supported in a new setup.
From a legal lens, Indian law neither mandates nor prohibits this model.
“Our courts consistently apply one guiding principle, which is the welfare and best interests of the child, and nesting can fit comfortably within that framework when it genuinely promotes stability and emotional continuity,” Pavani Sibal, a family lawyer tells India Today.
Advocate Vandana Shah, senior divorce lawyer, agrees and emphasises the socio-legal perspective that really shapes the case.
“What is important is the socio-legal perspective. Now, when legality comes in, what matters are your assets. The family home becomes an asset. You have to document what happens to that asset – not the fact that you are doing nesting – but what happens to the property five years down the line.”
But that’s only part of the picture. For nesting to run smoothly, clear rules and boundaries are essential.
In shared custody situations, nesting aligns well with the idea that parenting is a continuing responsibility rather than a contest over residence. In single-parent custody contexts, nesting becomes more delicate, according to Sibal.
“It must be structured carefully: clear rotation schedules, defined financial responsibilities, rules for use of the home, and a built-in dispute resolution process. Courts are receptive when parents demonstrate cooperation and present a detailed parenting plan that prioritises the child rather than parental convenience.”
However, both lawyers agree that it is more of a transitional design.
“Let’s not forget, divorce is a separation of your lives and your assets. You part ways so that you can each live as you choose, but how fulfilling would your post-divorce life be if you both keep returning to the same home?” Advocate Shah cautions.
Her experience suggests nesting to be a fabulous idea if it is done two or three years down the line. “Initially, let the child stay in the primary residence with the primary custodian. Two or three years down the line, when your pain has diminished, then nesting would be a good idea for a temporary period of time.”
One tense home or two peaceful ones
Essentially, nesting is not a one-size-fits-all solution. It requires emotional maturity, mutual respect and clear boundaries, which are not always present in divorces shaped by family pressure or long disputes.
Dr Desai believes that at a young age, kids are also looking for emotional cues from parents to make sense of life and its challenges. “Whatever decision the parents take, if it is embedded in respect and courtesy, the children will feel emotionally safe.”
The real question is not whether the model sounds progressive. It is whether couples are emotionally (and financially) capable of handling it after divorce, because every story is different.
