Non-Custodial Mothers - explanation for fathers

[grahamg]

You were interested in how/why we became non-custodial mothers. To be honest, the reasons are very varied, but I'll give you a few examples of some women from our organization starting with my own.

My ex husband left our children and myself in March of 2000. It was a loveless marriage for the last 6 years or so, and we both knew that. There was no animosity between us... we simply lived more like roommates than husband and wife yet neither of us wanted to be the one to make the first "move". When he finally did, he moved in with his brother while the children stayed with me. I'd worked throughout our 8 years of marriage but for the last year of it had taken time off for health reasons, and became a stay at home mother. I was still doing that when he left. He'd agreed to continue to pay our bills (mortgage, utilities, etc.). One day he went and took them from school. I didn't find out until the bus ran that afternoon and our children weren't on it. I called the school who told me his mother and him had picked them up. I got in touch with him at his mother's house and he told me "It's cheaper for me to keep them". Nothing I could do as we were still married and had equal custody rights.

I wound up moving in with my father (who lived 100 miles from my husband and children), and eventually got a job waiting tables. I then lived in a hotel room because my husband said that my father's house was too small for the kids to come and visit me there (don't ask me why a hotel room was more acceptable than a small house. I can't answer that.). I would get the children on weekends for visitation. There were times I didn't make enough in tips to house or feed myself, much less my children, and I slept beside a dumpster that was behind the convienence store next to the hotel.

To put it bluntly, I gave my ex custody of our children. I couldn't provide stability for them and he could. I didn't know if they'd have a roof over their heads or food in their stomach from one day to the next. That was no life for a 4, 5, and 6 year old to live; sleeping with mom beside a dumpster. I couldn't put them through that, so I did what they needed instead of what I wanted (and what every parent wants) - to have their children with them. I did what I thought was best at the time, and that was for them to be with their financially stable father instead of their mother.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Another story is of our Founder. Her and her ex husband had a 50/50 custody arrangement. One day he told her he was moving to Pennsylvania (they lived in Florida at the time), 1200 miles away and informed her he was taking the children with him. She immediately filed an injunction to stop the move-away, but on the day of court his attorney pointed out that a legal document had not been signed properly and the judge ruled (based on that technicality) that her ex could move their children 1200 miles away. As soon as court was over, he left with the children and she didn't even get a chance to say goodbye to them. His attorney knew this document wasn't signed properly ahead of time and withheld that from her attorney. As a result of Beverly's case, her attorney quit practicing Family Law because they were so upset over this fact.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Another story is of a mother who moved to a different state after the divorce to better her life. Once she moved, her ex started interferring and practicing PAS on their daughter (who he had custody of). I have been on the phone with her when she called her daughter, I've heard this child's grandmother (her ex's mother) in the background telling the child what to say. I've heard this child go from saying "I love you" to 2 weeks later telling her mother "I hate you, you're nothing but sh**" (and this is a 10 year old, BTW). She hasn't had a visit with her daughter in about 3 years now.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


There are many, many reasons....

They simply ran out of money to fight.
The children became so alienated from them that they gave up.
Lies were told in court by the ex and believed.
Evidence was refused to be looked at by the judge.
False allegations of abuse were made.
False allegations of molestation were made (and these were usually made towards the mother's new boyfriend or their husband).
Promises were made, and then withheld by the ex.
Attorneys who were supposed to be working for them were actually aligned more with the ex.
Attorneys that were paid didn't do the work they were paid to do (sloppy representation).
Children were taken by the ex and moved away.

I'm sure most, if not all of those, look sadly familiar to you.

There is one difference between non-custodial mothers and non-custodial fathers, and one difference only - gender. We face the same issues that men face - bias in a courtroom (even though the bias may be "different" we do still have it, and I'll explain that momentarily), trouble even getting our children's school or medical records, the courts not enforcing visitation orders or issuing contempt rulings against the custodial parent, denial of visitation, denial of phone calls, denial of contact at all, having CPS called on us because of a vindictive ex, false allegations being believed despite evidence to the contrary, having to be subjected to supervised visitation based on those false allegations... the list goes on and on.

As for the bias issue I mentioned earlier, men do generally have a bias going into a courtroom initially and I admit that. I've seen it, and experienced it with my current husband who is a non-custodial father. Custody usually IS granted to a mother, and that's where the bias towards non-custodial mothers come in. The view in society is that no mother could possibly lose custody of their child unless they were unfit, and that is so untrue. Be honest... what was your first thought upon hearing about mothers without custody of their children? That they are druggies, abusers, molestors, had their children taken from them by some government agency..? Those things simply aren't true in today's society as more and more fathers gain custody. In the U.S. alone there are almost 4 million non-custodial mothers (This number is from the U.S. Census Bureau which only tabulates "households with single parent father" though. This isn't counting the 5 million children who are living with grandparents or other family members so another 5 million could be added to that 4 million number, and can also be added to the 15 million non-custodial fathers figures as well. So... about 9 million mothers without custody in the U.S.) Our bias is from society, which then trickles down into the courtrooms. If we don't have custody to begin with, then something must be wrong with us. The term non-custodial is not synonomous with unfit however.

Was I an unfit mother? No. I was a mother that couldn't support her children, true... but unfit? Not at all. Was Beverly an unfit mother? No. The other woman above? No. As a matter of fact, she has 5 other children, all of whom live with her. If she were unfit, wouldn't they have been taken away?

This is no longer an issue that is gender specific. Both women and men are relegated to weekend parents, have our rights stripped away from us, are accused of horrendous things against our own children, and seen as nothing but a wallet. What made us so unfit to care for our children after a divorce (or in the case of unmarried parents, a break up) when before that split, we were totally capable of doing what we're now accused of not being able to do? We took care of our children, read to them, tucked them in at night, fed them, clothed them, took them to school and helped with class projects and homework... and suddenly, almost overnight, we became imbeciles that can no longer do these things? And when I use the term "we" above, I am referring to men and women both. In the case of women, we were usually the primary caregiver in the marriage yet now we're placed on supervised visitations with the same children we cared for day in and day out by a judge who has seen us for 2 hours, based on "supposed" allegations that we or a family member have suddenly turned into raving lunatics and child molesters. We (again referring to both men and women) were good enough parents to take care of our children in a marriage, but now that the marriage is over we suddenly aren't. Why is it that the judges, advocates, attorneys, and lawmakers can't see this as a farce?

I know this has ran long and I apologize for that. I won't take up any more of your time.

NANCM forum leaders, (National Association for Non-Custodial Mothers)

[MixedBag]

this site changed it's name many years ago from

Father's Rights To Custody.....to it's present name

Separated Parenting Access & Resource Center.....

And I probably got the names a bit wrong, but you get the idea.

Yes, this site and NON-PROFIT organization was started by a Dad who was fighting to gain custody of his child....

But it has grown into a place to be used by all

[FLMom]

Thank you so much for writing here. I'm glad SPARC is what it is, for both mothers and fathers that want equal access to their children.

I won't go into details about my situation, but I know all about the bias. It's almost normal for a father to just see his kids every other weekend. That supposition is SO sad to me. It's just as sad as the supposition that non-custodial mothers have something wrong with their mothering gene. We're seen as defective and something to be sneered at.

Simple reason I'm a NCM? I filled out the divorce papers myself and checked the wrong box. Two tiny strokes of a pen. X. I thereby relegated myself to the whims of my ex.

I hope our causes join together, and we unite in the belief that both mothers and fathers deserve to be a permanent fixture in their children's lives.

FLMom

[Kent]

Your stories would be heart-wrenching.
Yes, would-be.
So many fathers here have endured so much worse. Reading it time after time has numbed my sensitivity.

In all your stories, the mothers lost custody due to either a technicality, or just giving up.

Most men here were not the victim of a technicality, nor did they ever give up.
They proved time after time that they were the better parent, that the mother was alienating the child(ren), was abusing the child(ren).
But they lost custody because of biased judges.

I myself lived for 3 years not knowing today if I was able to buy food tomorrow. I could have just given up, and end feeding my attorney.
I didn't. I'd rather starved to death than give up on my son. Today I share 50/50 custody with a former prostitute who admittedly (in court) took our 2 year old son with her to her customers. Just to give you a taste of bias.
If I had been a gigolo, I wouldn't even have gotten supervised visitation.

And yes, this is a website for non-custodial parents, not just fathers. I know you will get support here from everybody.

Initially, it just rubs me wrong to read how unfair the world is since a few mothers didn't get custody. Welcome to men's reality.

Kent!

[FLMom]

As it usually goes, just when I think I've seen the worst thing possible, something else comes along and I'm left speechless again.

Kent, that is probably one of, if not THE worst judicial decisions I've heard of. But there's always tomorrow. And I've found that tomorrow never ceases to amaze me.

My circumstances and experiences have drastically changed my outlooks on how "fair" the courts are. Judges that make decisions like the one in your case should be out of office, or sent for some serious retraining.

Until that happens, and until there comes a time that courts see families in a scenario that approaches reality, I will be here, one post at a time. I'll be educating people I know r/l, through one divorce with children at a time.

I was apprehensive when I first came here. I thought that because I'm an NCP I'd be viewed at having a screw loose. I'm happy to say that I feel like I belong here, just like any other parent, man or woman, that wants to be fully involved in their children's lives.

I too now have 50/50, thanks to SPARC and those that have come before me here. My technicality was only the tip of the iceberg in a full blown battle including neglect, PAS and blackmail. But I didn't write it all out, just because it would probably be mundane compared to what others have gone through. Like I've said, there's always tomorrow to boggle my mind.

I may be in a minority of a group, but when the whole group sucks, who wants to be a member? I don't want to be a part of men's reality---I don't even want men to have that reality. I want to make things different. Maybe we can sway the spin of the axis a little. That's my goal, anyway.

I have to be able to look my children and future grandchildren in the eyes and have enough feeling of self-worth to be able to look back at them. That starts with change, no matter what the problem or who's agenda it is.

One more post, one more day,
FLMom

[Sherry1]

He packed up my son (14 years old) and moved him to Alaska so I wouldn't be able to see him.  I couldn't fight it legally because my son was so totally on board with the whole thing.  So, I just did the best I could.  Sent him cards, called him a lot and never brought up his father.  I didn't see him for 3 years.  But he became a young adult at 18 and I started seeing him again.  His father's pas didn't succeed.The Alaska thing didn't work out for my son or my ex, the only reason he took him there was to get him as far away from me as possible.  My son now just lives one state away and an hour flight away from me.  We have a good relationship.

[sdbleve]

<>

Not trying to pick a fight...just curious.  Had you marked the correct box would it have ended up the other way around.  Would your ex have been the NCP? Relegating him to your whims?

As I have stated in other posts, I think that 50/50 custody should be the presumed outcome if parents have to break up a family.  That is 50/50 legal and physical custody.  There should not be a "Custodial" parent. There should be "Parents" period.

[FLMom]

><>myself and checked the wrong box. Two tiny strokes of a pen.
>X. I thereby relegated myself to the whims of my ex. >>
>
>Not trying to pick a fight...just curious.  Had you marked the
>correct box would it have ended up the other way around.
>Would your ex have been the NCP? Relegating him to your
>whims?
>

With a question like that, I do feel like you are picking a fight, whether you think you are or not.

The answer is that while I wrote up the division of custodial time 50/50, when it came to whom the primary would be, or would there be none, I X'd the wrong box. So from the start, it never would have ended up the other way around. I came out of the starting block wanting 50/50 for our kids.

My ex did what it seems some of the CP mothers have done that fathers here have dealt with--he took his position as CP as authority to make me pay for not wanting to be married to him. That is something I'd never do to my children, so your sum answer is a definite "no".



>As I have stated in other posts, I think that 50/50 custody
>should be the presumed outcome if parents have to break up a
>family.  That is 50/50 legal and physical custody.  There
>should not be a "Custodial" parent. There should be "Parents"
>period.

>I agree, wholeheartedly.
>

[grahamg]

Dear All,

Many thanks for your responses here.

I obtained the letter I used to start this thread from a friend on another forum, who was responding to yet another friend of mine, a father's rights campaigner who was of the opinion that all non-custodial mothers were unfit parents.

I think he was squarely put right on that score, don't you!

I was also trying to get him to support my petition to No. 10 Downing Street, but he's turned me down flat unfortunately, claiming that by bringing child abuse into the petition will only make matters worse or playing into the hands of those making false allegations.

In that respect I have found other father's campaigners across the globe (I use forums in the US and Australia) who have the same fears. However I feel they may all be wrong because if false allegations are made, and then withdrawn or proved to be false or unfounded then the rebuttable presumption in favour of contact would then be avalable or beneficial to that parent, along with all those who didn't have any allegations made against them. I think it is a curious stance to take, especially by father's rights campaigners, saying you can't have more parental rights for those who are known to be safe, or no one is saying are not safe to be with their children, because that will possibly prejudice others who are not so fortunate (or indeed not safe).

If I cannot get much support for my petition so be it, I am only one individual trying to raise an issue I feel may assist others, but I may be wrong in my thinking and/or may not be making my arguments well enough.

I will tell you that "instinctively" I am in favour of sole custody arrangements - I don't want to go into the reasons for you, although I do also accept that where parents agree, equal parenting can be fine too.

My petition would not contradict legal measures for 50%:50% legal and physical custody arrangements though, so I would hope those of you who do not like sole custody and see it as the root of all evil, will nonetheless feel able to support my petition.

The custodial parent's ability to curtail the involvement of the other parent even further, or totally exclude them, is of course the aim of my petition. I think fear of exclusion is fuelling all kinds of reactions or attitudes - if you think as a parent "if I don't go for 50%:50% custody then I will end up with no contact at all with my children" - this presents dilemma's doesn't it? You may even think your child would be better off in the custody of the other parent, but afraid to say so in case stating that might be used against you as justification for your exclusion.


Good luck to all - and I hope one or two of you, who are able and eligible, will feel my petition is worth your support - my main purpose for coming to this forum.

Graham