Joint physical custody

[Che]

I have a 3 month old daughter. Her mother and I are not married. I hired a lawyer and am asking for joint physical custody. She was served on wednesday and has stopped allowing me to see my daughter. I have had my daughter every monday and tuesday since she was born. I really want joint physical. Does anyone have any tips or insight on what I can do to help get this? I understand that the courts are biased against fathers here and I need any help that I can get. Thanks. I am in Arizona if thats important.

[Jade]

>I have a 3 month old daughter. Her mother and I are not
>married. I hired a lawyer and am asking for joint physical
>custody. She was served on wednesday and has stopped allowing
>me to see my daughter. I have had my daughter every monday and
>tuesday since she was born. I really want joint physical. Does
>anyone have any tips or insight on what I can do to help get
>this? I understand that the courts are biased against fathers
>here and I need any help that I can get. Thanks. I am in
>Arizona if thats important.


The first thing that you need to do is establilsh paternity.  

And come up with a plan that involves frequent contact with both parents and one where most nights are spent at just one home.  Babies that young need continuity.  Not being ushered back and forth from one home to the other.  

Your distance is also going to play a factor.  If you live 40 miles away, you can forget about joint physical at any age.  That is simply too far.  

Now if you live in the same town and same school district, you have a very good case for when the infant is older for joint physical.  

But there isn't anything that you can do until paternity is established through the courts.  

[Che]

>The first thing that you need to do is establilsh paternity.

I have filed a paternity complaint.  In the complaing I am also asking for joint legal and physical custody.

>Your distance is also going to play a factor.

I live only a few miles away.  Maybe 10-15minutes.

>Now if you live in the same town and same school district, you
>have a very good case for when the infant is older for joint
>physical.  

what do you mean when the infant is older?  Are you saying I don't have a case at this age?

[mistoffolees]

>
>
>>The first thing that you need to do is establilsh paternity.
>
>
>I have filed a paternity complaint.  In the complaing I am
>also asking for joint legal and physical custody.
>
>>Your distance is also going to play a factor.
>
>I live only a few miles away.  Maybe 10-15minutes.
>
>>Now if you live in the same town and same school district,
>you
>>have a very good case for when the infant is older for joint
>>physical.  
>
>what do you mean when the infant is older?  Are you saying I
>don't have a case at this age?
>


You ALWAYS can make a case. It's just a little harder at a very young age to go for joint physical (especially in some jurisdictions).

See what your attorney says, but there's nothing preventing you from asking for joint physical, but not starting at 50:50. Perhaps you start with a relatively small number of overnights and the number increases as the child gets older - eventually moving toward 50:50. But with that young a child, you definitely want a good attorney.

[Che]

>You ALWAYS can make a case. It's just a little harder at a
>very young age to go for joint physical (especially in some
>jurisdictions).

To quote the guy from the direct tv commercial "so your saying there IS a chance!"  

 But with that young a child, you
>definitely want a good attorney.

Well I already have an attorney.  I think he is good but I wouldn't know how to tell anyway.

[knoot7]

OK -  I personally would NOT limit myself and options by not requesting for joint physical and legal custody NOW! It is so hard to change the status, obtaining joint after the fact. EVEYONE here will tell you that much - even the one's who have already responded!  

Plain and simple, when filing request for joint physical and legal. There is absolutely NO reason why you should NOT ask for that. Your child is young. Your child WILL adjust! You have seen her every Monday and Tuesday and it was working perfectly until ex started to use her as a pawn and denying visitation because you want it official! Keep doing what you are doing. GO FOR WHAT YOU WANT!

When a child grows up and they are only aware of being at Mom's house Monday Tuesday, Being at Dad's house Wednesday, Tursday and alternating weekends...the kid will NEVER know anything different! The child will adjust just fine and NOT be terribly affected as some may make it out to be!  They actually know what to expect. They will learn the schedule and the days of the week  and learning the calendar is easier as they get older. I speak from complete experience! The every other weekend thing is not appropriate for any kid (esepcially younger ones) and certainly not enough time for a child to know the parent for the weekends only - especially while young! Keep your time Monday and Tuesday, then add in alternating weekends. Making the time exactly 50/50! This is completely acceptable, a child can flurish, and both parents can be involved with school work, weekends , and will not limit time because they are "too young".  If this is all the child knows - this is their life and this become VERY normal for a child!

The holidays time should be spelled out NOW as well. Specifics are important!   Address these items now, so as baby grows so it will hopefully not have to be addressed again! Schooling and school vacations do not have to be spelled out and fought over if you follow the weekly suggestions...you both get the time. If a family vacation comes up, just state you will work to ensure the other parent does not loose parenting time!

Holiday suggestions that have worked well for my family. Christmas eve at my family's house, Christmas eve night dropped off to spend Xmas morning with other parent. 11/12pm Xmas day pick up to spend with  parent who got Xmas eve dinner time. Thanksgiving, one get the morning, one gets afternoon - if location allows! Families do not mind changing dinner times to be at 12 or at 4 to allow for all memebrs to join!


It is so much more difficult to get more time once an order has been deemed official. Even if it spells out as the child gets older time increases... it is not necessary to do that!

[Jade]

>OK -  I personally would NOT limit myself and options by not
>requesting for joint physical and legal custody NOW! It is so
>hard to change the status, obtaining joint after the fact.
>EVEYONE here will tell you that much - even the one's who have
>already responded!  
>
>Plain and simple, when filing request for joint physical and
>legal. There is absolutely NO reason why you should NOT ask
>for that. Your child is young. Your child WILL adjust! You
>have seen her every Monday and Tuesday and it was working
>perfectly until ex started to use her as a pawn and denying
>visitation because you want it official! Keep doing what you
>are doing. GO FOR WHAT YOU WANT!
>

A status quo has already been set. And the status quo shows that the mother is the primary caretaker.  

And an agreement that has more time built in as the child gets older and better able to handle the back and forth between 2 homes is legally binding.

[Che]

>A status quo has already been set. And the status quo shows
>that the mother is the primary caretaker.  

Im not  sure what your point is.

>And an agreement that has more time built in as the child gets
>older

CAn I have joint physical custody with an agreement that as the child gets to a predetermined age the move to 50/50 is completed?  It almost seems like that would be harder on an older child than on a baby.  

>and better able to handle the back and forth between 2
>homes is legally binding.

What do you mean by better able to handle the back and forth?  I have been hearing things like "the baby is too young for joint physical" and "it would be too traumatic for the baby to spend 50% with the father" and "maybe when the baby is older and better able to handle it"   What studies are the people saying these things referencing?  I don't want to do anything that would harm my daughter but I just don't see how spending half of her time with me would do that.  

[mistoffolees]

>
>>A status quo has already been set. And the status quo shows
>>that the mother is the primary caretaker.  
>
>Im not  sure what your point is.

The court is always going to lean toward the current situation as long as it's working. Your current situation is that the mother has physical custody, so you're going to have to work to counter that presumption.

>
>>And an agreement that has more time built in as the child
>gets
>>older
>
>CAn I have joint physical custody with an agreement that as
>the child gets to a predetermined age the move to 50/50 is
>completed?  It almost seems like that would be harder on an
>older child than on a baby.  

Yes. That is what Jade just said.

>
>>and better able to handle the back and forth between 2
>>homes is legally binding.
>
>What do you mean by better able to handle the back and forth?
>I have been hearing things like "the baby is too young for
>joint physical" and "it would be too traumatic for the baby to
>spend 50% with the father" and "maybe when the baby is older
>and better able to handle it"   What studies are the people
>saying these things referencing?  I don't want to do anything
>that would harm my daughter but I just don't see how spending
>half of her time with me would do that.  

Do a Google search or read the articles on this site (there are hundreds of articles on all elements of child rearing).

I don't know if that statement is a bias or based on facts, but you're going to have to do some research to find out. Since the child is currently in the mother's custody and since there's a bias for very young children to have a single primary caregiver (typically the mother), you have to provide some strong reasons to counter that. Do your homework.

I suspect (but this is not a legal opinion - see your lawyer) that Jade is correct. I doubt if you're going to be able to get 50:50 at this time. Rather, I would go for fairly liberal visitation (perhaps in short stretches - an hour or two a day is probably better than all day once a week at this age) now, with the amount of time increasing as the child ages. Overnights would be fairly infrequent early on, but could go to 50:50 as the child reaches school age (providing, of course, that the logistics work out - particularly that you're both living close enough to the child's school for this to work).

[knoot7]

Che-

Just to let you know, from real life experience, if a child doesn't know anything different and the child has spent 50:50 physical, they are not adversly effected. I have witnessed by two different children, one being my SS and one my nephew. My nephew knows nothing different and my SS doesn't remember anything so he is also indifferent to how "hard" life is living in two different homes!

My SS was 1 when his mother ditched him. Came back when he was 2 and has been 50:50 every since as my DH believes it is VERY important for a child to spend that 50:50 physical. Both children are A students now. Both children get two households of stuff, both chilren get two parents who adore them and some, like my SS has the opportunity for a Step parent to love them,  who cares for him as if he was her own, both parents are able to watch them grow up insetad of being on the sideline.  Both children get to live two different households and have two different rules, if that is the case. The child will learn the households, the child will adjust just fine. Both parent get to participate in the childs life completely instead of seeing them every other week. My brother has son 3 days one week 4 days the next week. It works well. Myself - I have my SS 5 days one week and then 2 days the next week. You are NOT far from these types of schedules being you already had her 2 days EVERY WEEK (for those that missed that fact) that is until you served to make an official schedule and your ex made your daughter a pawn.

BTW - in SS and nephews situations both homes are VERY different, different life styles, different parenting, different foods, different rules, but it certainly makes a very well rounded educated child who has the ability to understand and learrn and know what and how to handle themselves in different life situations and experience the many ways life can change. I can say both children impress adults wherever they go. They get the most compliments I have ever seen children get on how well adjusted they are, how well they behave, how well they listen, how well they pay attention, how well they learn in school and how well they flurish. Like I said they were very young. Too young is ONLY an opinion, just as this post is. However, I am providing you with knowledge on two different children who have been back and forth their entire life and it isn't/doesn't have to be  a detrimental experience as  it can be made out to be.

Other posts suggest that chilidren are too young, and theirs may be in their mind, but like I said from experience - you should go for what you believe. You HAVE already had two days a week since she was born. All you are doing is making it official and adding a few days extra which is FAR FROM detrimental to any child! You have to take all posts with a grain of salt. You can listen but do not have to take the advice of these posts as the ONLY way and the END all to everything. There are strong opinions and the users experiences built those opinions.

I think you are not requesting anything that is out of the park. Once you establish paternity, she is only 3 months old, you have the rest of her life to spend with her. Be as amicable with her mother as possible. I know it will be hard, but THAT and the 50:50 placement  IS what is best for everyone especially your little girl ! Custody has not been officially established by the court system so technically no one has sole physical custody.

Make sure you have a room for her and you have your home set up for a child - child proofing, etc....show that you are ready to have her with you more than just those two days a week! I am sure you have done that already since you have been there as much as your Ex has allowed.

[Kitty C.]

.....can anyone tell me the difference between taking an infant to daycare 'every work day' and having a 50/50 split with custody, where the child only has to change location/environment 'once a week'?  Seems to me that the daycare situation would be much more disruptive to an infant than a 50/50 split would be.  And I've seen many infants thrive in daycare situations.  So I figure if an infant can handle going to daycare almost every day (and there's millions out there who do), why can't they switch homes once a week?

[knoot7]

>.....can anyone tell me the difference between taking an
>infant to daycare 'every work day' and having a 50/50 split
>with custody, where the child only has to change
>location/environment 'once a week'?  Seems to me that the
>daycare situation would be much more disruptive to an infant
>than a 50/50 split would be.  And I've seen many infants
>thrive in daycare situations.  So I figure if an infant can
>handle going to daycare almost every day (and there's millions
>out there who do), why can't they switch homes once a week?

phenominal point! A child can be left at day care between 7 & 10 hours a day according to federal disability a mother has to return to work when the child is between 6 weeks of age and 8 weeks of age. To be with a parent is MUCH different than brining them to daycare. IF the daycare is institutionalized they mayy not even get the same care provider day after day!

As stated before children are VERY versitile and can overcome adversity every step of their life as long as they have the complete support necessary.  

[Sherry1]

get joint legal and physical custody, however, likely not 50/50.  You should request 50/50 but more then likely will be awarded 60/40 or 70/30.

[Jade]

>
>>A status quo has already been set. And the status quo shows
>>that the mother is the primary caretaker.  
>
>Im not  sure what your point is.
>

My response:

The mother is already established as the primary caretaker.  And you are already established with less than 50% of the child's time.



>>And an agreement that has more time built in as the child
>gets
>>older
>
>CAn I have joint physical custody with an agreement that as
>the child gets to a predetermined age the move to 50/50 is
>completed?  It almost seems like that would be harder on an
>older child than on a baby.  

My response:

Small babies need the security and consistency of one main home.  

As the infant gets older, they become more aware of themselves as a separate individual and can handle the back and forth more easily.  

My youngest is 5 and has a hard time with the EOW, she would do better with one overnight rather than the whole week-end.  And her father and I lived together until she was almost 4 years old.  He was and still is very involved in her life.  She would not do well in a 50/50 arrangement.

My son, who is almost 8, would have had the same problem when he was her age.  Now, he would be able to handle a 50/50 arrangement if it were feasible.  Maturity and the ability to handle more comes with age.  

And it depends on how close the parents live together if it would work.  Parents who live 100 miles apart aren't in a situation where 50/50 would work.



>
>>and better able to handle the back and forth between 2
>>homes is legally binding.
>
>What do you mean by better able to handle the back and forth?
>I have been hearing things like "the baby is too young for
>joint physical" and "it would be too traumatic for the baby to
>spend 50% with the father" and "maybe when the baby is older
>and better able to handle it"   What studies are the people
>saying these things referencing?  I don't want to do anything
>that would harm my daughter but I just don't see how spending
>half of her time with me would do that.  
>

My response:

I am going by my experience with small children.  And I do have a lot.  

You can find studies that support your view, I can find studies that support my view.

The problem with those studies is that it is looking at the situation in a whole, not at the individual child.  And it is the individual child that is being asked to go back and forth between two homes.  

In my state, you would not even be getting overnight visits (unless they have already been established before you went to court) until around 2 years of age.  What you would be getting is more frequent visits during the week.

[Jade]

>>.....can anyone tell me the difference between taking an
>>infant to daycare 'every work day' and having a 50/50 split
>>with custody, where the child only has to change
>>location/environment 'once a week'?  Seems to me that the
>>daycare situation would be much more disruptive to an infant
>>than a 50/50 split would be.  And I've seen many infants
>>thrive in daycare situations.  So I figure if an infant can
>>handle going to daycare almost every day (and there's
>millions
>>out there who do), why can't they switch homes once a week?
>
>phenominal point! A child can be left at day care between 7 &
>10 hours a day according to federal disability a mother has to
>return to work when the child is between 6 weeks of age and 8
>weeks of age. To be with a parent is MUCH different than
>brining them to daycare. IF the daycare is institutionalized
>they mayy not even get the same care provider day after day!
>
>As stated before children are VERY versitile and can overcome
>adversity every step of their life as long as they have the
>complete support necessary.  


That should read SOME children are very versatile.  

Like I said, those studies don't look at the INDIVIDUAL.  

Which is what this father should be doing.  

BTW, my child did have to go to full-time daycare when she was 4 years old.

She became more clingy to me and didn't want to see her father as often because that meant less time with me.  

I wouldn't go making a blanket statement that all children do well in a daycare type of situation.  Because they don't.

And before you go saying that she was used to being home with me, she was also used to her father seeing and playing with her everyday until the separation, as well.  And yet, when it came down to it, it was the primary caregiver that she preferred.  That may change as she gets older.  

But then I am looking at the situation on an individual basis.  

[knoot7]

Infants, toddlers and small children up till they become a tween have a great ability to pick up on the vibes of the situation they are put in.  Tweens - they can actually see what is up and can choose to ignore, morph or play sides. MOST children can sense when something is wrong or there is tension in the air. They have the ability to pick up on the simplest emotion even if it is being restricted to inside instead of being displayed outwardly. They have an amazing ability to learn. If they have never known anything different how would they learn their situation was "bad"? Children learn to know what is "good" and what is "bad" even by 9 months. Children pick up their parents vibes, and can act according to how their parents react.

Do what is best for your child.  I wanted to provide you with information for two different children, in two different families that did not have or display the insecurities or have any issues with living in two different homes 50/50.  I can also provide you with many more situations of small children that have thrived. There is no need to continuously justify the statements presented to you in this situation as this was an individuals experience and I certainly do not want to push you and say your wrong for wanting to take your daughter 50% of the time. I commend you for cooming here, doing your research and doing what you know in your heart is right! I also know what you are trying to obtain is what is right for a child!

This was not a study, this is my life with my SS and my nephew's life. These children now are 13 and 6 and as stated before thrive and are more adaptable to every situation than most kids are. Children are resilient as long as they are provided for in a healthy environment and have the support necessary. I mean true support, not words or actions, but support from the heart which includes actions and words and working towards what is best for the child.  There are so many studies that state to limit the child's interaction with their father is more detrimental than trucking them back and forth! There are studies which can prove or disprove all situations.

Children are resillent to change and adversity as long as the support is from the heart and is truly believed.  I am sure you comprehend that the information provided in this thread is only the experiences of others and of course everyone is different! You are an intelligent person. This is just providing you with the hope and faith that you can obtain what you are going for. That what you are going for IS what is best for a child. Being your child is so young this is the PERFECT opportunity to make a status quo right from the start instead of changing her life in the middle and trying to get her to adjust when she is 4 or something.   You understand what was presented was specifically stated exactly the situation on two different children that did not have any issues and a "hard life" living in two homes.

The parenting plan you should go for is exacly what you are going for! Know that if a child does not know anything different and has been living in two homes their ENTIRE life - it is logical to conclude that their life IS "normal" to them!  It IS harder to change as they get older, as they become aware of themselves and their surroundings, it does make change harder - much harder!  If they never have to deal with the "change" and they only know the situation they are in - they will be completely indifferent to it!

Good luck!

[Kitty C.]

I'm not making a 'blanket statement' here.........I'm basing this on the MILLIONS of infants across the country that are currently in daycare.  Whereas you are only basing your opinion on experience with one child.  I'm certainly not basing my opinion on any studies, just the fact that millions of infants are currently in daycare.....out of necessity.  And I never said they 'do well', just that they're in daycare.  But I still feel that how they adapt can be dependent on how the parents enable the situation, whether good, bad, or indifferent.  

The thing to remember is that children ARE very resilient and can adapt to change very well if allowed to.  The other thing to remember is that the younger the child is, the easier the transition can be made.  I can almost bet that the reason for your child's reaction is strictly because of her age, because she was going through that phase.

When DS was 4 (and we were living with my mom temporarily, she babysat while I was at work), he went through a period of standing at the door and screaming for me to not leave him.  But this happened ONLY because he had just been traumatized from having his dad take off with him to CA and it taking me 6 weeks and 3 trips there to bring him back.  He was dealing with severe separation anxiety.  He had many symptoms relating to that experience that lasted for up to 2+ years.  That's an extreme example only.  But children at that particular age often go through separation anxiety, just in varying degrees and circumstances.

[topnotchdad]

Just wanted to add my 2 cents here,  there is no reason why you shouldn't ask for joint physical and joint legal custody.  Especially since you've had the baby 2 days a week since she was born.  Try to get your court date ASAP, b/c you've already established the status quo that you CAN have overnights (assuming that's what you meant by having her every Mon/Tues), and that the mother had trusted you/allowed you to have those overnights.  Don't give her the time to establish a new status quo of limited visitation in the meantime.  Make sure your lawyer points out to the judge that BM voluntarily gave you overnights with the baby.

My DH had 2-3 overnights per week with his daughter from the time she came home from the hospital.  Mostly b/c the mom either wanted to go out, or wanted to get drunk, etc.  She pulled the same stunt and tried to take it away when he tried to get things "legalized."  The judge ended up giving DH MORE time, b/c DH said he wanted 50/50, and outlined his plan, etc.  (And BTW, BM used the arguement that she was breastfeeding the child, and the judge told her she would have to pump and/or supplement (as she had been doing before.  He didn't let her use that as an excuse to prevent overnights).

And that is an excellent point, that kids go to daycare every day, and in general they aren't TRAUMATIZED by it.  Lots of babies spend the night at their grandparents house on a weekly basis, and they aren't traumatized.  It will be much easier to get this set now as a baby, then to do it when the child is older.  The other poster is right, if it's all the kid has ever known, then they will be automatically adjusted.  My DSD is 9 years old now.  She's had 50/50 legally since she was 3.  And before age 3, she was usually 2-3 nights with dad, 2-3 with mom, and 2-3 with grandparents.  She was shuffled around a LOT, and she's a great, smart, well-adjusted, normal kid.

[Che]

 b/c you've already
>established the status quo that you CAN have overnights
>(assuming that's what you meant by having her every Mon/Tues),


Actually I have not had her overnight yet.  I usually pick her up mon and tues morning around 7:30 and drop her off around 7:30 at night.  BM only withheld her one week.  She let me take my baby this past week and now wants to discuss an arrangement.   She doesn't have money for a lawyer and she does not want to borrow it from her family.   I don't want to cause trouble for her and her family but she has said that if I ask for joint physical she will hire an attorney to fight it.  After reading some of the responses here however I am even more convinced that what I need is joint legal and joint physical now while my baby is still young.  I truly believe it would be the best thing for my child.  I am considering a compromise with her that I will only ask for the 2 days a week I already see my girl until she reaches a certain age if she doesn't fight joint physical.  I need to figure out a way to explain this to her so that she will understand that this is going to be benificial to our child.  Any suggestions on what to tell her so that she goes for joint physical?  I think she just doesn't want to be without her baby at all  and that may be why she wants to fight it.  (She isn't a very good communicator so it has been hard to understand her feelings on this.)

[Jade]

> b/c you've already
>>established the status quo that you CAN have overnights
>>(assuming that's what you meant by having her every
>Mon/Tues),
>
>
>Actually I have not had her overnight yet.  I usually pick her
>up mon and tues morning around 7:30 and drop her off around
>7:30 at night.  BM only withheld her one week.  She let me
>take my baby this past week and now wants to discuss an
>arrangement.   She doesn't have money for a lawyer and she
>does not want to borrow it from her family.   I don't want to
>cause trouble for her and her family but she has said that if
>I ask for joint physical she will hire an attorney to fight
>it.  After reading some of the responses here however I am
>even more convinced that what I need is joint legal and joint
>physical now while my baby is still young.  I truly believe it
>would be the best thing for my child.  I am considering a
>compromise with her that I will only ask for the 2 days a week
>I already see my girl until she reaches a certain age if she
>doesn't fight joint physical.  I need to figure out a way to
>explain this to her so that she will understand that this is
>going to be benificial to our child.  Any suggestions on what
>to tell her so that she goes for joint physical?  I think she
>just doesn't want to be without her baby at all  and that may
>be why she wants to fight it.  (She isn't a very good
>communicator so it has been hard to understand her feelings on
>this.)

To be honest, you haven't even established overnight visits.  

You may end up going to court.  Because, even if she doesn't want to borrow the money, that doesn't mean that she won't.  Do they have mediation available in your state?  

As for a way to explain why shuffling a young baby who needs continuity between 2 homes is best, I can't think of one single argument that would get me to agree to that in a small child.

Rather than trying to get joint physical now, see if she will sign an agreement that allows frequent contact now and that will move to joint physical when the child is older and more mature.  And get a judge to sign off on that.

I would also add in a move away clause that states she needs to get your permission or the court's permission to move the child away.

Joint legal is a given in most states.  

[Jade]

And I know of at least one person who started out with 50/50 custody.

The child didn't do well.  Fortunately for the child, the parents weren't as concerned with their rights and did what was right for the child.  

The child now has one primary home and visits with the other parent.  And has drasticallly improved.


Having 50/50 from the start is no gaurantee that the child will do well.  

[Jade]

>I'm not making a 'blanket statement' here.........I'm basing
>this on the MILLIONS of infants across the country that are
>currently in daycare.  Whereas you are only basing your
>opinion on experience with one child.  I'm certainly not
>basing my opinion on any studies, just the fact that millions
>of infants are currently in daycare.....out of necessity.  And
>I never said they 'do well', just that they're in daycare.
>But I still feel that how they adapt can be dependent on how
>the parents enable the situation, whether good, bad, or
>indifferent.  
>
>The thing to remember is that children ARE very resilient and
>can adapt to change very well if allowed to.  The other thing
>to remember is that the younger the child is, the easier the
>transition can be made.  I can almost bet that the reason for
>your child's reaction is strictly because of her age, because
>she was going through that phase.
>
>When DS was 4 (and we were living with my mom temporarily, she
>babysat while I was at work), he went through a period of
>standing at the door and screaming for me to not leave him.
>But this happened ONLY because he had just been traumatized
>from having his dad take off with him to CA and it taking me 6
>weeks and 3 trips there to bring him back.  He was dealing
>with severe separation anxiety.  He had many symptoms relating
>to that experience that lasted for up to 2+ years.  That's an
>extreme example only.  But children at that particular age
>often go through separation anxiety, just in varying degrees
>and circumstances.

Only on one child?   Now that is a blanket statement.  I gave an example using my child.  

I have lots of experience with small children that only reinforce my opinion.

Those studies don't take the individual into consideration.

[knoot7]

I am sure you will get to an amicable agreement and you sound like you want to work with the mother AND do what is best for YOUR child. I only caution you having too much faith the mother will do what is right just like you want to do.  Sometimes they start out that way and then turn into something you rather not deal with. PLEASE do not limit yourself in the future what ever agreement you come up with! Come up with an agreement and work with her AND your attorney, then get it signed off by the judge. One good point stated was to add the moving clause. You will find may issues with that here, if you continue to want to participate with this site.

If your child is provided with the complete support, love and assistance from the heart. If the child does not sense tension and anger in the mists of each situation between parents, you have a strong chance of having a child that can adjust well to all situations without limiting your child, yourself or your ex. I would definitely NOT want to settle to an agreement that would limit your capabilities for the future and being in her life 50%. I see nothing wrong and have experienced setting a status quo NOW for overnights, and days....and if it doesn't work well, then change it. However, limiting yourself now may be detrimental to your chances in the future. They can say - "well it didn't matter before when she was younger, why does it have to change now?" This is the way it has beeen working and see no need to change it. That happens WAY TOO MANY TIMES! How can this be agrued and supported? Set the status quo now and have the ability to change IF your child doesn't do well.

You have the right idea for 50/50 legal and physical IMMEDIATELY the rest as to times and days etc... do what YOU feel is right! Just don't limit yourself!

There are many more studies and examples on issues within a childs life with limited or no access to the father - especially daughters. As adults their future relationships can be/are dependant on their relationship with their father!

This thread had provided you with both sides of life. Children that do well and children that do not. I KNOW you will know what is best for your situation and there is no need to continue to argue which way is best. After all it is only opinion.  It is common sense that everyone is an individual. We all understand this concept.  Many times people think since it is for one child it must be that way for all children which can come across loud and clear. This thread has presented you with both sides of the fence and pleanty of info and examples. To limit your daughters access to you can/will be more detrimental in her future than going back and forth between two parents as long as you can work towards the greater good . Be agreeable remove all animocity between you and your ex, and your daughter can thrive!  

If it is all she has ever known - this will be/IS her status quo. Set that status quo now while young and the adjustment will most likely go MUCH smoother than trying to adjust at a later date. Essentially this can take weeks and even months if it goes to court and by that time...she will no longer be 3 months old!

You can't change the past only the future.

[Kitty C.]

You know, I'm tired of arguing with you, Jade.  And there's no point in trying to discuss something with someone when they contradict themselves.  Yes, I said you were basing your experience on ONE child, because THAT'S ALL YOU GAVE.  And you were talking about a pre-schooler, whereas all I've ever mentioned is infants.  There's no comparison between the two.  Irregardless of whether it was YOUR child or not, it's still ONE child.  And if you're so dead set on infants not having constant and continous contact with both parents, then how do you justify daycare?  Or do you feel that one parent should always stay at home so that infants would not have to leave and deal with the supposed confusion of going back and forth between home and daycare EVERY day?  You never did answer that question and that was my original question in the first place.

Maybe you wouldn't run into so much interference on this site if you were at least willing to consider other points of view, instead of pushing your one and only opinion on others and giving the implication yours is the only opinion that matters.

[topnotchdad]

Maybe you should try to get her to go to mediation with you, to work out an agreement.  You don't "have" to let a judge decide for you.  If you guys can come to an agreement, you can get your mediation agreement entered as a court order, OR, you can just agree to go by your mediation agreement, and if she suddenly starts withholding your time afterwards, that's when you take your case to the judge, and say, "hey judge, we were doing fine with this agreement we came up with TOGETHER until BM decided to go against it, can you do something about it?"  Compared to a lawyer, mediation is MUCH cheaper, and if you're able to reason with the mom, you are likely to get most of what you want.

The key might be to go into mediation asking way more than you expect, and then give a little in order to get what you want (like bargaining for a car).  For example, go in there saying you want 50/50 right away, and no child support, since you'll have the baby half the time.  Then you might bargain it down to 2-3 days (include some overnights if you can), and offer her some child support, in order to even get your overnights at all.  Then have her concede that you will work up to 50/50 by the age of X.  Does that make sense?  And DEFINITELY put in a move-away clause.

If she's hesitant with overnights, maybe you could work it out where you keep her overnight one of the nights where mom has her all day.  That way she's not really going 24 hours without seeing the baby, which might be what she's worried about.  Or if your days are free, go for more days during the week.  If your schedule allows, you could be the "babysitter" while mom's at work, and then you could work an evening/night shift.  That way both parents get the maximum amount of time, as opposed to a babysitter getting some of the custody time.

When you're bargaining, make sure you want her to know that you want to HELP with the baby, not just that you're "taking" the baby.  You know, like "I know you used to love to go out with your girlfriends on Saturday night, I want to help you by taking the baby on Saturday nights so that you can still go out."

My DH went several years getting a much better deal on custody time and child support by just making agreements with BM rather than going to court.  Then when they got to the point where they couldn't come to agreements anymore (essentially, BM said she was moving away and taking the child with her), that's when he went to court and got his 50/50 legal, since he had already set the staus quo as 50/50, and they already had a mediation agreement saying 50/50.