In Colorado’s family courts, one phrase is repeated so often it has become a shield against accountability: “Kids are resilient.” Judges and lawyers use it to justify decisions that ignore the very real harm children endure when exposed to abuse, instability or neglect.
But resilience is not immunity. Children may adapt in the moment, yet the scars of trauma don’t vanish. They resurface in classrooms, in hospitals and sometimes in headlines.
Colorado knows this truth all too well. From Columbine to Aurora to Boulder, our state has been scarred by mass shootings. Research from The Violence Project shows that nearly 70% of mass shooters experienced early childhood trauma or exposure to violence. Trauma ignored in childhood can echo decades later in devastating ways.
To dismiss children’s suffering under the guise of resilience is not only careless but dangerous.
The phrase “kids are resilient” is comforting, but it is also misleading. The landmark Adverse Childhood Experiences, or ACEs, study found that children who endure multiple traumas — abuse, neglect, exposure to violence — are far more likely to face depression, substance abuse, chronic illness and even early death. Trauma rewires the brain: The amygdala, which processes fear, becomes hyperactive, while the prefrontal cortex, which governs decision-making, weakens.
So yes, children may smile, play and appear to adapt in the moment. But beneath the surface, their nervous systems are on high alert, their bodies storing stress that will echo across a lifetime. When courts dismiss this reality, they are not protecting children but abandoning them.
☀ MORE IN OPINION
When we talk about abuse, the conversation too often stops at physical violence. But coercive control — the use of intimidation, isolation, financial restriction and constant monitoring to dominate a partner — can be just as damaging, especially for children.
Kids in these households don’t simply recover and move on. They live in a state of hypervigilance, constantly scanning for danger, learning to silence themselves to avoid conflict. Research shows they are significantly more likely to develop anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress later in life.
And the harm doesn’t end when the relationship does. Post-separation abuse is well-documented: Abusers often escalate control after separation, using children and the courts as weapons.
In Colorado, parents have testified that custody evaluators ignored these patterns, dismissing them as “high conflict” rather than recognizing them as abuse.
These failures are not abstract. In Colorado, the state’s own Domestic Violence Fatality Review Board reported that in 2024, eight children, some as young as three months, were killed in domestic violence cases, many in the midst of custody disputes (Colorado Attorney General’s Office report). Their deaths, like Kayden Mancuso’s, were not accidents but the result of a system that too often discounts abuse warnings in favor of parental access.
Additionally, a ProPublica investigation revealed that our custody evaluation system is riddled with conflicts of interest and a lack of oversight, with some evaluators carrying histories of domestic violence themselves. The case of Rachel Pickrel-Hawkins, a Colorado mother jailed for refusing to send her children to court-ordered reunification therapy with their father—an ex-police officer facing sexual assault charges—shows how devastating those failures can be.
When judges feel that hesitation, that quiet voice warning them something isn’t right, they must listen. Too often courts default to the language of “fairness” between parents, even when it places children at risk. True fairness is not equal time at any cost; it is ensuring that children are safe, stable and free from harm.
Colorado lawmakers have introduced bills to reform custody evaluations and strengthen domestic violence training. These are important steps, but they will mean little if judges and evaluators continue to hide behind the myth of resilience.
We owe children more than platitudes. The science is clear: trauma leaves lasting marks on the body, the brain and the spirit. It shows up in classrooms as learning struggles, in hospitals as chronic illness and in communities as cycles of violence and despair.
If something makes you pause, that hesitation is worth heeding. Whether you are a judge, a policymaker or a parent, the choice must always be safety over parental “fairness.”
Colorado has an opportunity to lead the nation in reform. But until our courts stop dismissing trauma and start prioritizing child safety, families will continue to pay the price. Anything less is a betrayal of the very children we claim to serve.
Ava Moore, of Denver, is a writer and advocate focusing on family court reform, coercive control and the lasting impact of childhood trauma.
The Colorado Sun is a nonpartisan news organization, and the opinions of columnists and editorial writers do not reflect the opinions of the newsroom. Read our ethics policy for more on The Sun’s opinion policy. Learn how to submit a column. Reach the opinion editor at opinion@coloradosun.com.
Follow Colorado Sun Opinion on Facebook.