For Heraclitus (centuries VI and V C), Greek philosopher, nothing is immovable, invariant, that is, nothing he remains what he is; in contrast, everything is changedded, everything is in movement, everything flows, everything is to devir. The engine of this transformation is the contradiction that is contained in all the things. This wants to say that in the interior of each thing it has opposing forces in fight between itself and that they make with that it leaves of being what is and if becomes another thing. In the time of Scrates and Plato, the word ' ' dialtica' ' it assigned a certain way to argue or to dialogue that it had for objective to explicitar the contradictions gifts in the reasoning of the interlocutors, in order to surpass the divergences of the particular opinions and to reach the true knowledge. This direction is next to the etimolgico, therefore dialectic comes of the Greek term dialektk, that it means ' ' the art to argue and to use arguments lgicos' ' (Houaiss dictionary). Throughout the history of the philosophy, many philosophers had made use of the dialectic concept, attributing it diverse connotations, but always emphasizing the aspect of the contradiction.

This, therefore, constitutes a basic element in the perspective dialectic. But who, in fact, systemize the dialectic as method of interpretation of the reality was an idealistic German philosopher of centuries XVIII and XIX Hegel call. It conceives the dialectic as a process that results of the contradictions gifts in the thought. Marx absorbs the dialtico nucleus of the hegeliano thought, but it confers a materialistic character. For it, the reality, the world, the society also is permeados by contradictions, but these do not derive from the thought, and yes in the way as the men produce its material existence and of the type of social relations that establish between itself in this productive process. Thus, for Marx and Engels, it is not the thought that, organizing itself of contradictory form (thesis, antithesis and synthesis), produces the reality material, but yes the reality that, for force of contradictions in it gifts (as the fight of classrooms, for example) generate the different forms of thought.


The divorce can represent a legalization of the discord between the couple, that takes to a reorganization of the domestic structure and the convivncia between parents and children, generating distresses and uncertainties in all the members of the family and threatening the personal stability of these, causing changes in the familiar dynamics (SCHABBEL, 2005). The quality of the relations between parents and children, as well as the guarantee and conservation of optimum interest of these last ones, is intrinsically on to the form of relation and communication 11 that the parental pair will go to adopt the separation after. Frequent, the relation and the communication between the separate parents are crossed by not decided conjugal questions or badly decided, taking them it an interaction that costuma to spoil, beyond the mutual respect, optimum interest of the children. The situation of the divorce and the dispute of guard is a phenomenon of great impact inside of a familiar system and can provoke a series of reactions in the children, between them the conscientious fear or not of that the other genitor also goes even so and the idea of that the adults are not trustworthy/honest (SCHABBEL, 2005). Thus, for having a great potential to provoke instabilidades and changes in the familiar dynamics, the papers and the interpersonal relations between the members of a family, the phenomenon of the divorce can need attention and specialized cares of legal and not legal operators, with sights to the retaken one of the cycle of growth of the families and, in special, of the psicossocial development congruente of the children (SCHABBEL, 2005). For Zuim and Leite (2010), the dynamic of the express conflicts in the services of Justice that families in situation of guard dispute take care of, generally have pipe the side with the logic of the procedural course, where if it always searchs the culprit for the dissolution of the conjugal union, the mutual attack the image of the other and autopromoo.