So Tired!

[mistoffolees]

And what part of that says that a woman like sparrowwoman can't post here?

Too bad your attempts to monopolize this board by excluding anyone who doesn't agree with you are so transparent.

[SPARC Admin]

>NOTE : the above is the forewood that graciously explains the
>very essence of why this board exist.  Nothing is gained by
>you coming to this forum and posting

I'll have to disagree. SPARC welcomes all parents without regard to gender or marital status. We welcome mothers as well as fathers, and nothing in the 'forward' on the homepage should be construed to mean anything different.

In short, "sparrowmom" has as much right to post here as anyone, including you. This is indeed the "Father's Issues" board, but that in no way implies women are not welcome or that they shouldn't feel free to post messages here.

[Davy]

NOTE : the above is the forewood that graciously explains the very essence of why this board exist. Nothing is gained by you coming to this forum and posting some convulted message berating the father of your child and/or another father expressing sadness because he was not present when his daughter scored a hat trick. Oh, wait a minute, there is a gain. You remind some of us of how badly the system is broken ......

I adamantly agree with the full text (ie every word) of the foreword.  My post was CLEAR.  

It said 'NOTHING IS GAINED .... BERATING THE FATHER ... or ANOTHER FATHER....REMIND SOME OF US HOW BADLY THE SYSTEM IS BROKEN.  Nothing more nothing less.  My post was appropriate.  

Please let me know if you would like further clarification or understanding.

Thanks for your response.

[SPARC Admin]

>I adamantly agree with the full text (ie every word) of the foreword.

It's called a "homepage". And nothing in it rules out the the value of motherhood, nor should it be taken as such.



>It said 'NOTHING IS GAINED .... BERATING THE FATHER ... or
>ANOTHER FATHER....REMIND SOME OF US HOW BADLY THE SYSTEM IS
>BROKEN.

There's no need to shout, Davy, unless I'm typing too fast for you.


>Nothing more nothing less.  My post was appropriate.

I never said it wasn't. Please stop putting words in my mouth.
 

>Please let me know if you would like further clarification or
>understanding.

I doubt that would be necessary, productive, or even worthwhile to spend my time pursuing, nor do I believe you could provide it if asked.

[sparrowmom]

Hello All!
 Before I even attempt to respond to Davy's reply ...

I want to Thank the SPARC Admin and others that backed me up. So here you go!
       THANK YOU!   :)
Thank you to those that actually read my "Entire" post and understood.

So.... if you all don't mind, and the admin is OK with this, (Please feel free to delete if needed)
The following will contain my ""DEAR DAVY"" reply.

DEAR DAVY,
  Thank You So Much for your warm welcome to Your Space!  
I have read Every Word of your post and am happy to say that...Well I read it.. Did not understand most of it though.
But I am Happy to say that I understand your viewpoint and direction.
Everyone is entitled to have one.

I have mine... You have Yours... and somewhere in the Middle.... There is only the Truth...
Unfortunately, When sides are taken, the middle is the one who Hurts the most.

So, I bet you have wondered WHY it took me so long to respond to your ?? reply.   Well.....
Here it is, New Years Day, (I started this reply after the happy 12 hour) And I know Where my Teenagers are! Do You?
At 12:05am they called and we drove three  blocks to pick them up from a friends home.
Not because they were Drunk, too young to drive or because we did not trust them. We did it because it was cold out (Don't live in a high area of crime obviously) I am now posting at a very late hour because after they came home we spent some time togather, talking about things. Now that they are asleep, I have time to reply.

Now Davy, I could spend the next  three hours replying to everything you perceive as wrong about my right to post here... But I don't have time to waste keyboard energy on someone whom will only read what they wish to see.

But, as I stated before, I have been on every side..  

SO.. YOU QUOTE:
""Information To Assist Non-Custodial Parents

Welcome to SPARC, the Separated Parenting Access & Resource Center.
SPARC's goal is to ensure that children of divorce continue to have meaningful relationships with both parents, regardless of marital status. We advocate on behalf all non-custodial parents to ensure they get equitable treatment in court and continued access to their children. In addition, we work to promote gender equality in Divorce and Custody issues.

I SAY:  Think I covered that in my first post...  You know, where I said that I was... CP, NCP, SP.... So on and so forth?
  ((Do You Read???   anything....))

I also wish to say.....   I was not Berating Anyone...
((except when I responded you your incoherent nonsense))
I was merely stating True and Documented Facts. Issues that cause me concern....... and  guess...... I wished for some other points of view.. (Guess I got Yours!)  
I apologize if I Hit a Nerve. :(

As I said, I could say so much more... But I will say this.... I Bet most posts are made when the Truth is close to the true emotion.

That said, (without even beginning to adress Davy's attack on anyone other than myself)

The SYSTEM is Not Broken....  
However, it is unfortunate that some "Parents" are.....

Sparrowmom

[SPARC Admin]

>The SYSTEM is Not Broken....  
>However, it is unfortunate that some "Parents" are.....

I'm a custodial parent, and from my experience I would say the system is badly broken in quite a few different ways. The last 10 years have made this clear to me beyond any doubt.

[hagatha]

Guys,
 
While it has been some time since I posted here, I have been a member of SPARC since almost it's inception.

From a NCP point of view I have heard some horror stories that truely made me cry.

By the same token I have heard some NCP's that were not interested in anyone but themselves.

I remember when there was a nasty fight between this site and a mothers site (MAFIA). simply because we thought we were on opposite sides of the fence. I would like to think that issue has been resolved and both sites have evolved to understand and appreciate the others point of view.

I believe the system is broken because there seems to be a cookie cutter solution to individual problems.

There will ALWAYS be parents that can't see beyond their own hurt and anger to give their kids the opportunity to love the other parent.

There will ALWAYS be parents that can't be bothered supporting their children and will look to the other parent or berate the other parent for not being financially responsible. (both NCP & CP)

There will ALWAYS be parents that will put their own needs, wants, and desires before their children.

There will ALWAYS be parents that believe they are the better parent and complain or berate the other parent for what they perceive to be bad parenting.

There will ALWAYS be parents that should have never had children and the children will suffer.

And finally there will ALWAYS be parents that will do whatever they can to make sure their children are happy, healthy, productive people and realize their children are the most important thing in their lives and will swallow their hurt, pain, and disappointment to keep their children happy.

Now as afar as the initial post, if YOU choose to drive 2,3,4 hours to a sporting event, good for you. I'm sure your child appreciates you being there. And in your situation as you have described it would seem the NCP can't see beyond himself to put the child first. However you don't know for sure why he chooses not to attend. If he was an uninvolved father before you were divorced, why would you assume he would change after the divorce?

However, that may not be the situation every time here. When my DH's ex chose to involve his daughter in every single event she could we could not attend all the events. Some of these were scheduled on his parenting time and while he would have loved to e there, there were other family obligations. On the times we were able to attend, we were confronted by the ex and her entire family and the hostility was so bad it became detrimential to the child. We stopped going. And then of corse we were berated for not attending

Where should he have drawn the line with our other children? One thing I made sure of when my husband and I got together was that our lives would not revolve around his daughter. If we had plans we did not cancel because his child was not available. Our other children would never feel less important because they lived with us.  We always made sure to inform the other parent when we had plans on her time and gave her the opportunity to allow his child to be included, She always declined. But by the same token when her plans occured during his time we always allowed the child to attend. .

I could probably go on and on about the difference between my DH's parenting style and his ex's, but it would only show how they were different. It would not prove who was the better parent. I am CERTAIN his ex believes herself to be a good parent. And even though I may not agree with her about this, I am not the one that gets to judge. The kids are the ultimate judge and they will make their decisions on their parents eventually.

As I have said in the past, there was only one perfent family, and their son was crucified by his peers. No one is ever perfect, and it isn't fair to point out others inperfections when we ignore our own.


The Witch

Remember . . . KARMA is a Wonderful Thing!!!!!

This is a game of cat and mouse.. to win, you must become the DOG!

[mistoffolees]

>I'm a custodial parent, and from my experience I would say the
>system is badly broken in quite a few different ways. The last
>10 years have made this clear to me beyond any doubt.


I this this is equivalent to surveying a hospital emergency room and concluding that everyone in the world is sick.

There are certainly lots of problems with the system, but so far, no one has provided a better one (the only proposal was the suggestion that compliance with support payments would  be greater if there were no enforcement - which is clearly absurd). What you're ignoring is the huge number of people who DON'T post here and who manage OK. The two studies that have been provided so far demonstrate that the system works for a very large percentage of people.

That doesn't preclude trying to make it better, but arguing that the system is entirely broken isn't very helpful. That leads to despair and people doing foolish things.

[SPARC Admin]

>What you're ignoring is the huge number of people who
>DON'T post here and who manage OK.

I this this is equivalent to surveying a gymnasium and concluding that everyone in the world is healthy.



>The two studies that have
>been provided so far demonstrate that the system works for a
>very large percentage of people.

And there are dozens of studies that demonstrate the exact opposite. Why are the studies you cite more believable?


>That doesn't preclude trying to make it better, but arguing
>that the system is entirely broken isn't very helpful.

1) I never said it was "entirely broken". I said it was "system is badly broken in quite a few different ways" and I stand by that statement. I deal with the system as a custodial parent and I can tell you for a fact that in general, things are a mess.

2) Denying that the system has problems won't make it better either, nor would I consider it helpful.

3) Saying the "system has problems" is like saying that "the Titanic stopped for ice". It's true, but it hardly communicates the scope of the issue.



>That leads to despair and people doing foolish things.

And the way things are handled now doesn't?

[mistoffolees]

>>What you're ignoring is the huge number of people who
>>DON'T post here and who manage OK.
>
>I this this is equivalent to surveying a gymnasium and
>concluding that everyone in the world is healthy.

Fortunately, no one has ever done that.

>
>
>
>>The two studies that have
>>been provided so far demonstrate that the system works for a
>>very large percentage of people.
>
>And there are dozens of studies that demonstrate the exact
>opposite. Why are the studies you cite more believable?

Funny, but no one has ever provided any studies here that say that the system fails in a majority of cases. Where are these 'dozens of studies'?

The studies that I am referring to are the only ones that have been provided so far.

>
>
>>That doesn't preclude trying to make it better, but arguing
>>that the system is entirely broken isn't very helpful.
>
>1) I never said it was "entirely broken". I said it was
>"system is badly broken in quite a few different ways" and I
>stand by that statement. I deal with the system as a custodial
>parent and I can tell you for a fact that in general, things
>are a mess.

Based on what? Your experience? The experience of people who come to a board set up to complain?

How about some statistical evidence to support the claim that it fails in a large percentage of case?

>
>2) Denying that the system has problems won't make it better
>either, nor would I consider it helpful.

Fortunately, no one has done that.

>
>3) Saying the "system has problems" is like saying that "the
>Titanic stopped for ice". It's true, but it hardly
>communicates the scope of the issue.

That's true. I'm still waiting for valid evidence that 'Titanic' is a relevant analogy.

>
>
>
>>That leads to despair and people doing foolish things.
>
>And the way things are handled now doesn't?

At least if people work through the system you don't get foolish advice like the person who keeps posting that child support is unconstitutional and people should stop paying it. Or the advice that you can tell a judge that he has no say in how divorced people raise their kids.