Introduction

[Momfortwo]

Just wanted to introduce myself and there isn't a board for that purpose, so I chose this one.  I don't want to get into too much detail for obvious reasons, but I have been divorced for almost 3 years (we split a year before the divorce was final) and have 2 young children.  I am the primary parent when it comes to my kids.   I live in the state of NJ. 

[gemini3]

Just curious momfortwo, and since you were kind enough to introduce yourself, I thought I would ask.  You have been on this board for almost five months.  In that time you have made 110 posts - 109 of them in response to others questions or advice.  Since your other post was an introduction - you have yet to post a question of your own.  You're a CP... no step kids.  You refer to yourself not as the "custodial parent", but as the "primary parent".  (Which I guess makes the other parent, what, secondary?)

I took a moment to read the posts of yours that I haven't read yet... and it struck me that you seem to have very little compassion for, or understanding of, the plight of the NCP.  You have made a lot of bold statements, a lot of judgement calls, and given a lot of questionable advice - so I have to ask what gives you the credibility to be giving such advice?  Besides your "opinion".  What experience do you have that you can offer NCP's on this board?

A lot of what you have written is pretty disturbing, as it mirrors what a lot of NCP's hear from hostile CP's on a daily basis.  You don't seem to need any help co-parenting, since you appear to have all the answers and none of the questions... so I'm just wondering - why are you here?

[Momfortwo]

Just curious momfortwo, and since you were kind enough to introduce yourself, I thought I would ask.  You have been on this board for almost five months.  In that time you have made 110 posts - 109 of them in response to others questions or advice.  Since your other post was an introduction - you have yet to post a question of your own.  You're a CP... no step kids.  You refer to yourself not as the "custodial parent", but as the "primary parent".  (Which I guess makes the other parent, what, secondary?)

I took a moment to read the posts of yours that I haven't read yet... and it struck me that you seem to have very little compassion for, or understanding of, the plight of the NCP.  You have made a lot of bold statements, a lot of judgement calls, and given a lot of questionable advice - so I have to ask what gives you the credibility to be giving such advice?  Besides your "opinion".  What experience do you have that you can offer NCP's on this board?

A lot of what you have written is pretty disturbing, as it mirrors what a lot of NCP's hear from hostile CP's on a daily basis.  You don't seem to need any help co-parenting, since you appear to have all the answers and none of the questions... so I'm just wondering - why are you here?

I had a snide comment all typed out.  I think I will just stick with this one:

You clearly have an agenda.  One I don't care to participate in. 

But I will give you a little advice.  People aren't always going to agree with you.  Accept it.  As that is life and nothing you can do about it. 

[teacher98]

I agree gemini.  I have wondered myself what Momfortwo's purpose was on these boards.  I am all for healthy debate and seeing issues from both sides, however, since the purpose of this webpage is to support meaningful relationships with BOTH parents and most people are here to get help with furthering that relationship because, typically, (not always) the CP is the one that deters that relationship with the NCP, I don't feel that many of mom's posts are in any way helpful.  I realize we all come here with our own stories and experiences, but let's remember that this is 2009 and families come in all forms and the best family a child can have is equal access to two parents-a mom and a dad and the families that extend. If both parents live within reasonable driving distance to school and neither is a convicted criminal, everything else is petty "bull...." and needs to be put aside in the best interests of kids.  I am guilty of this at times, and need to remember what really matters. 

As a teacher, I rarely see 2 parents in the home with a SAHM and the dad at work. Many of my families are 2 parent families working and the kids get shifted around from daycare to grandmas to the neighbors or stay home alone all in ONE WEEK! No judge gets in the way of that and says that those children shouldn't be with both of their parents.  Why is it not okay for children of broken homes to go back and forth and be taken care of by 2 families and family friends that care for and love them? It is not a freaking competition of what parent can take better care of a child.  It is a team effort and BOTH parents need to step up to the plate every single time and work together. My Nana's old phrase "kill em with kindness" works for adults too. If the CP or NCP would start practicing that, then maybe we would get somewhere in this world. We could share our kids as equally as possible and remember that most of these kids are product of a love that once was and they have 2 parents that love them and deserve to share in their lives as equally as possible.

In my classes, I have had many students who had/have alternating weekly schedules or 2/2/5/5 schedules.  They miss assignments, they forget things, but no more or less than ANY OTHER CHILD in my class. The children with an issue are typically in a situation where the parents are working AGAINST each other instead of WITH each other.  They have different teachers and coaches and church, etc, so they are constantly learning different rules and cue switching. So I am so tired of hearing all the petty excuses of why kids can't switch between both of THEIR homes!

I am a step-mom (wife of a NCP who would like to be a 50/50 parent), soon-to-be bio mom, step-daughter, bio-daughter, sister of a step/bio mom, sister of a step/bio dad, sister of NCP and sister of a CP. Friend of all.

[gemini3]

You're right, I do have an agenda.  To make shared parenting the presumption in all custody cases, and to help NCP's who are being held hostage by their ex's or having difficulty getting access to their children.  My agenda is to change the current thinking so that there's no "winner" or "loser" in custody cases - because the real loser is the child.  That you don't care to participate in that is what I was wondering about, which was the reason for my question.

I don't care if you agree with me or not.  I care that you're discouraging NCP's who are having a rough enough time of things as it is.  I care that your advice often includes "if you don't like it go back to court" - which often is not feasible for many people after spending tens of thousands of dollars fighting for their children - or trying to live on 75% of their pre-tax income.  Hostile CP's often take that stance.  "If you don't like it you can take me to court."  They have control of the kids so they feel they can do as they wish because they know that the only way for the NCP to really do anything about it is to take them to court - and they know that the courts are often in the CP's favor.

You still haven't answered my question about why you're here - but you don't have to.  Your posts make that clear.

[Momfortwo]

You're right, I do have an agenda.  To make shared parenting the presumption in all custody cases, and to help NCP's who are being held hostage by their ex's or having difficulty getting access to their children.  My agenda is to change the current thinking so that there's no "winner" or "loser" in custody cases - because the real loser is the child.  That you don't care to participate in that is what I was wondering about, which was the reason for my question.

And I don't agree that the presumption of 50/50 physical is in the child's best interest.  You can have 2 fit parents and a child who simply cannot handle that type of arrangement.  Children aren't robots, they are individuals.  The individual child needs to be looked at.  And I really admire the parents who do that.  Unfortunately, I rarely see that.  Even in this forum.  It's too much about the rights of the parents than it is about the rights of the child. 

As is evidenced by your refusal to see that the father who is insisting on attending his kids' soccer games on his ex's week-end KNOWING FULL WELL that the child won't be able to participate is wrong for what he is doing, just like the mother is.  That isn't about the child, that's about the father's rights.  And the child is losing as a result.  Sometimes, being a parent means ignoring your rights and doing what is right for the child.  A personal example, when my youngest was younger, she had a very hard time being away from me for a whole week-end.  And if she saw me at my son's soccer games on my ex's week-end, she would have a complete meltdown.  I stopped going because it was not in her best interest that I be there.   It made it too hard for her.  Now, it doesn't appear to be an issue.  But if it still is, I am not going to go.  Why?  Because my kids come first.  Over my right to be there. 

But you are right, when a child is thrust into something that s/he cannot handle because there is a presumption that the child should be with the other parent 50% of the time, the child is losing.  Just like a child who can handle being with the both parents 50% of the time and clearly wants it is denied that because there is a presumption that is hard to overcome.

My ex and I don't have issues because we are able to set aside our differences and get along for the sake of the kids.  Neither one of us makes it about what our rights are.  Because, in the scheme of things, our rights aren't necessarily in the kids' best interest. 

And if the NCP doesn't like it, the ONLY option is to either live with it or go to court (and in the motion, request mediation).   Because if the CP is doing something that s/he doesn't agree with and it isn't addressed in the court order, those are the ONLY options. 

My posts make it clear that I am about doing what is in the child's best interest.  Just because you don't agree doesn't mean they are about anything else. 

[CuriousMom]

I think as 2 grown adults(who are also parenting children and yet acting this way), should both at this point agree to disagree and move on.  Everyone is entitled to their own opinion regardless of what the rest of us think.  It's whether you're adult enough to handle it.

Not pointing fingers at either but for the sake of the rest of us, let it go.

[Kitty C.]

Very good point, gemini..........

Gemini:  'You're right, I do have an agenda.  To make shared parenting the presumption in all custody cases, and to help NCP's who are being held hostage by their ex's or having difficulty getting access to their children.'

Momfortwo:  'And I don't agree that the presumption of 50/50 physical is in the child's best interest.  You can have 2 fit parents and a child who simply cannot handle that type of arrangement.'

That is the biggest difference.  On this forum, we emphasize shared parenting and parents working together.  NOWHERE in gemini's post did she say anything about 50/50.  Shared parenting is what can be worked out between the parents.  If that ends up being 50/50, then that's is what works for that particular family.  Often, it is some other combination that the parents are able to work out to the benefit of the children.

The one thing I have NEVER been able to figure out is why opponents have such a hang-up on 50/50, especially a week-by-week exchange.  In a scenario of 50/50, children only have to go between homes ONCE A WEEK.  Whereas any other arrangement automatically means two or more.  Teacher98 said it right:  'Many of my families are 2 parent families working and the kids get shifted around from daycare to grandmas to the neighbors or stay home alone all in ONE WEEK! No judge gets in the way of that and says that those children shouldn't be with both of their parents.  Why is it not okay for children of broken homes to go back and forth and be taken care of by 2 families and family friends that care for and love them?'

Exactly......if so many other kids from intact homes are doing it on a regular basis, why is it NOT okay for kids with separated parents?

What we promote here is the parents setting aside their differences and/or hatred for each other and work together for the children.  Learning to co-parent.  We try to be positive about it and want to emphasize working things out instead of involving the family court system that has a notorious history of creating more harm than good when left to make the decisions for the families if they cannot work them out themselves.

I truly believe that if separating/divorcing parents go into the court process knowing that they will have to share physical custody with each other (mandated presumption of shared joint custody), then it takes a lot of the animosity out of the situation from the get-go.  Start with 50/50 and work from there.  No, it will not work for everyone all of the time and that's a given, but if the courts forced the parents to work together instead of against each other, the children will win every time.

[Giggles]

Kitty & Gemini I couldn't agree more!!  My X and I did 50/50 (week on/off) and our daughter was the ultimate winner.  We divorced when she was 18 months old and now she's 17.  She's an honor roll student, takes all AP classes and will be going off to college next year knowing she has always had the love and support of BOTH her parents.  My X and I made sure we put HER needs before our own.

Prior to our divorce, the court made us take a class regarding children of Divorced parents.  It taught us how to get along for the benefit of the chilren and I think it should be mandatory for all divorcing parents.

We can all agree that 50/50 may not work for everybody, but it should be the starting point in every case!!

[Momfortwo]

Kitty & Gemini I couldn't agree more!!  My X and I did 50/50 (week on/off) and our daughter was the ultimate winner.  We divorced when she was 18 months old and now she's 17.  She's an honor roll student, takes all AP classes and will be going off to college next year knowing she has always had the love and support of BOTH her parents.  My X and I made sure we put HER needs before our own.

Prior to our divorce, the court made us take a class regarding children of Divorced parents.  It taught us how to get along for the benefit of the chilren and I think it should be mandatory for all divorcing parents.

We can all agree that 50/50 may not work for everybody, but it should be the starting point in every case!!

Every case?  Even ones that involve violence?  Sorry, but I think that the status quo should remain.  If one parent has been primary, to change that abruptly on top of the parents splitting will only add more problems.  Obviously, the older the child the less likely this is.  If the parents want to try 50/50 physical, it would be better to work up to it rather than thrust a child into it.  Especially if the child(ren) are really young. 

I know that for my kids, had that happened, they would not have done well at all.  Even now, they would have a problem with it.  Not to the extent that they would have 4 years ago, but they would still have issues with it.  It would work well for me as it would give me more time to concentrate on rebuilding my career. 

In my kids case, if they were thrust into a week on week off situation, they would be the losers. 

[Giggles]

Every case?  Even ones that involve violence?  Sorry, but I think that the status quo should remain.  If one parent has been primary, to change that abruptly on top of the parents splitting will only add more problems.  Obviously, the older the child the less likely this is.  If the parents want to try 50/50 physical, it would be better to work up to it rather than thrust a child into it.  Especially if the child(ren) are really young. 

I know that for my kids, had that happened, they would not have done well at all.  Even now, they would have a problem with it.  Not to the extent that they would have 4 years ago, but they would still have issues with it.  It would work well for me as it would give me more time to concentrate on rebuilding my career. 

In my kids case, if they were thrust into a week on week off situation, they would be the losers. 

Not every case involves violence.  So you would rather cut one parent down to a "visitor" in children's lives rather than them be a parent?  If you've never been in a 50/50 situation how would you know how it works?  How the children would react?  My daughter was 18 months old and did GREAT!!  Now she's nearly an adult...and is far more adjusted than many adults out there.  She has had both her parents in her life...not a primary and a visitor...she had PARENTS!!!

It seems to me from reading your posts...that you would've been the reason for your children not doing well.  Children do better with equal access to their parents....you don't think that should be and that is sad.,...I feel sorry for your children!!

[CuriousMom]

Giggles -

We were court ordered to take the co-parenting class, I think my area is starting to mandate it from the way my attorney spoke.  They actually asked when you registered the opposite parents name and if you were ever convicted of a crime/domestic violence/abuse - they made a point to seperate parents into different classes so they would feel comfortable sharing and contributing to the class.  I thought the instructor was great and kept my list of "I words" handy...still do :-)

[gemini3]

Every case?  Even ones that involve violence?  Sorry, but I think that the status quo should remain.  If one parent has been primary, to change that abruptly on top of the parents splitting will only add more problems.  Obviously, the older the child the less likely this is.  If the parents want to try 50/50 physical, it would be better to work up to it rather than thrust a child into it.  Especially if the child(ren) are really young. 

I know that for my kids, had that happened, they would not have done well at all.  Even now, they would have a problem with it.  Not to the extent that they would have 4 years ago, but they would still have issues with it.  It would work well for me as it would give me more time to concentrate on rebuilding my career. 

In my kids case, if they were thrust into a week on week off situation, they would be the losers. 

The status quo should not be based on a small percentage of cases - and cases that involve real domestic violence are a small percentage.  (Of course, all the false allegations skew the numbers.)

There should never be any talk of one parent being "primary".  Both parents are equally important in a child's life.  One parent staying at home while the other one provided enough income so that said parent could stay at home does not make the working parent "secondary".

An intact family is a shared parenting arrangement - so NOT doing that because of divorce (or other split if the couple isn't married) is something for the child to get used to, not the other way around.

It's a shame that you think your kids would be losers if they had a more equal parenting time arrangement.  I agree with giggles - maybe you're thinking has something to do with how well your kids adjusted to your divorce.  The parents are equally responsible for the child's adjustment post-divorce - and especially fostering a positive relationship with the other parent.

[Giggles]

Giggles -

We were court ordered to take the co-parenting class, I think my area is starting to mandate it from the way my attorney spoke.  They actually asked when you registered the opposite parents name and if you were ever convicted of a crime/domestic violence/abuse - they made a point to seperate parents into different classes so they would feel comfortable sharing and contributing to the class.  I thought the instructor was great and kept my list of "I words" handy...still do :-)

I'm glad to hear this!!  My X and I actually took it at different times.  He was reluctant at first...but afterwards we compared notes.  We agreed that is what helped us become better parents for our daughters sake!  Of course now my daughter at times gets miffed because her father and I are on the same page where she is concerned...hehehe

[Kitty C.]

Every case?  Even ones that involve violence?  Sorry, but I think that the status quo should remain.  If one parent has been primary, to change that abruptly on top of the parents splitting will only add more problems.  Obviously, the older the child the less likely this is.  If the parents want to try 50/50 physical, it would be better to work up to it rather than thrust a child into it.  Especially if the child(ren) are really young. 

I know that for my kids, had that happened, they would not have done well at all.  Even now, they would have a problem with it.  Not to the extent that they would have 4 years ago, but they would still have issues with it.  It would work well for me as it would give me more time to concentrate on rebuilding my career. 

In my kids case, if they were thrust into a week on week off situation, they would be the losers. 

Yes, EVERY case.........and you work from there.  Look at it like a point system:  you start with 50/50 and start deducting points for anything negative that would affect the child.  For example, if a parent has a criminal history that would have a severe detrimental affect on the child, that would severely limit the amount of parenting time to the child.  BUT....if that parent is able to clean up their act, make whatever amends needed (classes, fines, jail, etc.), and proves that they are ready and willing to co-parent, then a gradually increased parenting time should be considered.

I feel sorry for your kids, too.  Obviously you weren't or aren't willing to make the sacrifices necessary to make it work.  DS's dad and I had severe problems and he also was an alcoholic.  He ended up moving back to CA, but I told DS a long time ago that if he would have stayed in the area, I would have made sure DS saw his dad just as much as he saw me.  DS was surprised when I said it, as he knew we didn't get along personally, even tho we learned to effectively co-parent LD.  It would have been a huge sacrifice for me, considering I could have very easily had A&B charges filed against the ex when he tried to break my neck a few years before that.  It doesn't change the fact that we both love DS and DS loves us.  But if my ex would have proven that he could not handle it or it was detrimentally affecting DS, we would have had to make other arrangements.

As we're all fond of saying:  it's ALL about the kids and nothing about us.

[Davy]

Gemini,

Beautiful.  Your stated agenda is refreshing and uplifting.

Perhaps you should re-post it weekly so we can all be mindful of the many reasons we are lured to SPARC and the wealth of like-minded people that chimed in with still more valued input.    We all benefit and I am thankful to you and for you.   Your children and that lucky dog husband are blessed !

Maybe it is true that curiosity kills the cat.   I'm curious also.

[Momfortwo]

I feel sorry for your kids, too.  Obviously you weren't or aren't willing to make the sacrifices necessary to make it work. 

Feel more sorry for your kids.  It must be tough to have a mom who jumps to conclusions without knowing the full story.   I am not willing to risk my children's emotional well-being because some internet stranger thinks she knows my kids better than me.  You don't.  Nor do you know what is best for them.  You don't know their personalities.  You don't know anything about them.  The only kids that you would know what is best for are yours.

My kids are fortunate enough to have parents who DO get along for the most part.  And who put them first.  I know that is foreign concept for you because you simply refuse to see how a presumption of 50/50 physical can actually do harm to a child.  Fortunately for my kids, my ex and I aren't that blinded. 

BTW, all of the problems that everybody is posting here about with their ex's, I don't have with my ex.  Why?  Because what is in the kids' best interest is more important than what our rights are.  An example, my ex wouldn't show up at a game for the kids if he knew that the kids would not be able to participate as a result of his actions.  Another example, I suck it up and deal with the fact that my ex is there.  I even have him over to my house for the kids' bday parties.  Again, it's about putting the kid first.  Even if it means our rights get trampled.   

[Momfortwo]

It's a shame that you think your kids would be losers if they had a more equal parenting time arrangement.  I agree with giggles - maybe you're thinking has something to do with how well your kids adjusted to your divorce.  The parents are equally responsible for the child's adjustment post-divorce - and especially fostering a positive relationship with the other parent.

Uh, I don't recall stating that my kids' had a bad relationship with my ex.  They don't.  And the reason for that is because they weren't thrust into something that they couldn't handle.   

They could probably handle it better now that they are OLDER.  Because kids mature emotionally as they get older.  My ex, otoh, has a work schedule that simply does not allow more time with the kids, he doesn't even take them for an extended period in the summer (his choice).   As it is, when he sees them during the week depends on when he can get home at a reasonable hour.  I am the primary parent, it doesn't really matter if you like that terminology or not.  It simply is.   

BTW, parenting is rarely equal.  Even in intact families.   

[mdegol]

I really enjoy seeing the posts and the reasons that people are for joint physical. I have been reading a lot about shared parenting. To be honest, I was kind of put off by the idea at first. I see what you mean about starting at 50/50 and then working from there, depending on situation.  In my case, bf lives far away, but the more I hear of the reasoning, the more logical it sounds. And teacher's point is excellent. In today's world, so many actually caretake for kids, makes the argument about having two homes difficult on child moot. Also, hearing that it is working so well for so many people makes me feel more comfortable about it as well. I think Kitty is right, since a lot of arguing in court is about expectations, and what people think they are entitled to. Actually, in a married relationship it would be more of an adjustment for kids to only see one parent every other weekend. A great loss really. Parents have to make the commitment to live close together though (within same school district or other reasonable distance). But anyway, people who are able to do this right put their kids needs in front of their own, so that wouldn't be much of a sacrifice to be a major part of your kids life.

I guess the problem is that one bad apple spoils the bunch. In other words, everyone has to cooperate for it to be good. But parenting classes and other support, if it were put in place, would definitely help many people behave in a way that is in the best interest of their children. I really think one should have to take classes like this upon filing for divorce with children. That way you get introduced to the options early, before tons of harm has been done in the court system itself. And maybe give you a chance to rethink the relationship and whether or not it can be salvaged. Because, in the end, I think most parents want to do what is best for their kids, they just haven't been taught by society about shared parenting and how to do it. Mostly we just see the models of the fighting...the problems ect that we read about on here everyday.

[Momfortwo]

Not every case involves violence.  So you would rather cut one parent down to a "visitor" in children's lives rather than them be a parent?  If you've never been in a 50/50 situation how would you know how it works?  How the children would react?  My daughter was 18 months old and did GREAT!!  Now she's nearly an adult...and is far more adjusted than many adults out there.  She has had both her parents in her life...not a primary and a visitor...she had PARENTS!!!

It seems to me from reading your posts...that you would've been the reason for your children not doing well.  Children do better with equal access to their parents....you don't think that should be and that is sad.,...I feel sorry for your children!!

But you said every case.  BTW, feel more sorry for your kids.  They have a father who thinks that children are robots and act the same.   

Believe it or not, some parents do know their kids well enough to know how they would react to a schedule.   

Plus, there's the fact that my youngest became a completely different child personality wise when she was away from me for a whole week-end.  She was three at the time.  While your 18 month old may have done great, MY three year old couldn't even handle a whole week-end.  She's almost 8 now and is doing much better.   

I wouldn't jump to conclusions about how well my kids are doing.  Because they are doing very well.  They are happy and well-adjusted kids.  Your assumption that my kids aren't doing well simply because they weren't thrust into something that they couldn't handle really is off-base.   

I used to think that 50/50 physical was not good in any case.  I have since learned that kids are individuals.  One can't make a claim that kids' do better with equal access to their parents and have it be accurate 100% of the time.  Just like one can't make a claim that children do better when it isn't equal and have it be accurate 100% of the time.   

Your kid and my kid are perfect examples of that.  You had a child who handled it well.  I have a child who wouldn't have been able to.  Maybe, if my ex's schedule improves, that may change in the future.  But right now, 50/50 is not in MY kid's best interest.  And not because of my ex's schedule, but because of my kid's personality and emotional maturity.  Which is improving as she gets older.   

[mdegol]

Texas has a great law that my lawyer down there told me about. First of all, they require co-parenting classes, although I don't know at what stage of the process. Ok, so I might be wrong, but here is what I understood from my lawyer: In Texas, if you don't reach some kind of an agreement in mediation and you end up going to trial, you have to change lawyers. This gives the lawyers a good reason to not encourage their clients to fight. My lawyer didn't like this law, which prob means it should be in every state *smile*.

The way he made it sound, I think it was pretty new. I just think that a lot of fighting and hard feelings comes from the court process itself. Massachusetts would greatly benefit from a law like this. Here is the other extreme. The system here is set up so that you go to court and fight as much as possible. I guess it is because there are so many lawyers here. There is some mediation steps, but they aren't very effective. There is also a big father's rights movement here, but in the end I think some lawyers just use this so that clients who aren't really going to end up getting custody fight and both parties are forced to spend a ton of money. From what I understood, mom almost always gets physical custody. Then dad is told he was successful because he got a little more visitation than every other weekend and joint legal custody. Certainly this is not the intent of father's rights. Shared parenting is really the goal.

But shared parenting laws are difficult to pass. This is because of the fears that Momfortwo is expressing. It is not as difficult to pass laws to encourage parents to avoid court though Arguments that are unrelated to joint physical can be used to support these laws (lower court costs, less congestion in the court system). I guess it would be lawyers who would fight it though and they are pretty powerful.

If shared parenting should be the norm, fighting in court should be reduced as much as possible. An adversasial system is good when it comes to criminal law, but very damaging in family law. The process has to be set up so that parents are encouraged to come up with their own plans.  This also alleviates Momfortwo's fear since she and her ex would be able to choose an EOW schedule if appropriate. However, that law along with education on the topic, would likely result in many more appropriate shared parenting plans.  The thing that kills it in Texas is that Texas has a standard parenting plan, which in the end, everybody picks. It is a good plan, but pretty much an EOW plan. And mom almost always gets physical custody. If those elements weren't there, parents would pick what is best for them as a family (ideally).

As more people experience shared parenting and are successful with it, it would be much less difficult to pass laws that reflect this idea.  The major resistance is simply the fears that momfortwo is expresssing. People won't fear it if they see good examples of it.

[Giggles]

Momfortwo...do not feel sorry for my children, unlike your children, mine are emotionally stable because I do not reflect my insecurities onto them.

When I worked at a child development center, we had a name for Mother's like you...we called them "clingers" because they would cling to their children if the child would show the least bit of resistance to being dropped off.  The teachers would call up with a "clinger" and I would go back and most times had to literally pull the parent away from the child.  We had an observation room where the "Clinger" parent could view their child after they departed the room.  99% of the time the child calmed down and was interacting with the other children within minutes after the "clinger" parent had left.

Most of what we are saying is for you to be mindfull of the "advice" you give here.  You tend to come across as arrogant and totally defeat the purpose of this site which is to promote access for BOTH parents to their children.  If you feel that your ex isn't worthy of being a full time parent that is your opinion, but remember on here you are only giving YOUR OPINION and although you are entitled to that, be prepared to be told that you are wrong in your thinking.

[pcdad]

I too noticed the tone from Momfortwo. Does not seem to be an advocate of 50/50 parenting at all.  My X and I decided to be adults and worked visitation out amongst ourselves instead of the court stating when - why and where.  I have sinced moved out of state, my son is 16 and he stayed with his dad.  We have a total understanding that he is allowed to travel back and forth when vacations allow.  He talks to me everyday via phone, email & facebook.  He does not resent me moving. In fact he supported it knowing what my husband & I were going through with hubby's X, job, etc.  NOW for my husband and his X - wow - there is a trainwreck situation.  He has gone from having 50/50 to visitation only, to being primary (when mommy dearest had kids taken away for physical abuse) and back to visitation, then even more limited visitation.  As stated in previous posts, we are dealing with a very f&*ked up county in Wisconsin - not just our case many others there too.  IF we would have stayed in WI we would see his daughter 24 hours every other weekend.  With mom shoved so far up our business it isn't even funny.  Daughter is terrified of mom, we fought for primary, lost and lost even more visitation.  Again, we have no criminal history, -  okay so we each have 1 speeding ticket within 5 years - each work, no drug use/alcohol abuse, etc.  Nothing other than the fact that the GAL has something going with X and her atty.  I know this sounds like the "poor me" syndrome, but if any outsider reviewed this case they would see it.  The problem is getting an outsider to be able to view it.  This past weekend hubby's X blocked his phone # from hers so he cannot even call his daughter on the phone, she knows my # and will not answer it.  He works 5am to 6pm so I had to call the courts, we were instructed once again, get another atty, GAL would be reassigned,  court costs, etc.  another $6,000+ to get the same results from that court system as in the past.  We were told nothing immediate could be done so he could talk to his daughter, becuz phone calls were never addressed in the CO.  We do not have the money to do it.  Even if we did, we are done wasting $$ on legal crap to lose.  His X sure seems to have it - remember she does not work, supposedly lives on $550/mo in CS, but she runs to her atty for EVERYTHING, she knows how to use the system.  My husband has tried in vane to tell her that her bitterness towards him is only hurting 11 year old daughter - she doesn't see it that way.  His X was the one sleeping with half his male relatives and everyone else in town, she filed for divorce - yet she has bitterness towards him.  I have been on both sides of the CP and NCP fence - I agree that every case should start out 50/50.  What really needs to be done is the parents need to be adults and work together for the sake of the kids - not use them as pawns in their "game".  The courts need to reprimand parents that cannot grow up.  This will never happen, the courts LOVE to have a full docket - even if it is b.s. that brings the parents in.  The court officials, social workers and everyone involved has JOB SECURITY - which is very valuable these days.  The courts do NOT have the best interest of the kids, it has all boiled down to money unfortunately. 

Everyone falls into this trap - look at past posts and recommendations on issues - go back to court get a CO to solve that matter.  Most issues should not even be brought before a judge if - PARENTS WOULD GROWN UP!  This needs to be changed. 

[gemini3]

But you said every case.  BTW, feel more sorry for your kids.  They have a father who thinks that children are robots and act the same.

Believing that your children will learn to adjust to their new schedule does not mean that you think your child is a robot.  Kids do adjust to changes in their schedule.  For example - their schedule is changed at least five times a year when they either start or stop going to school because of holidays.  That is a change in their schedule - and one that everyone expects that they will do just fine with.  In many places kids spend the night at school, and they adjust to it and grow up normally.  In some instances children move often due to their parents work.  They also do just fine.  With the proper emotional support, and teaching the child how to deal with the new situation, children will do fine with just about any schedule.

Believe it or not, some parents do know their kids well enough to know how they would react to a schedule.   

Plus, there's the fact that my youngest became a completely different child personality wise when she was away from me for a whole week-end.  She was three at the time.  While your 18 month old may have done great, MY three year old couldn't even handle a whole week-end.  She's almost 8 now and is doing much better.

There is a difference between knowing that something may upset the child and teaching them how to deal with that situation, and trying to sheild them from it.  Change is a very big part of life, and I think that sheltering kids from it has a negative effect on their ability to mature emotionally.

Of course your 3yo would be different when she came back from a weekend with dad - because her dad (and not only you) is having an impact on her because he is helping to raise her.  To be opposed to his influence on your child is quite telling.

I wouldn't jump to conclusions about how well my kids are doing.  Because they are doing very well.  They are happy and well-adjusted kids.  Your assumption that my kids aren't doing well simply because they weren't thrust into something that they couldn't handle really is off-base.

Thrust into something they couldn't handle.... unfortunately with divorce, there's a change no matter which way you look at it, and it's change that the children must adjust to.  Be it a new schedule at mom's house/dad's house, or having their relationship with one of their parents diminished.  To say that kids can handle losing a close relationship with one of their parents more than they could having to spend time at two different houses is pretty myopic.  You won't see the impact of the diminished relationship until the kids or older.  There are numerous studies out there to tell you what you can expect from your children when they are older:  adjustment difficulties into adulthood, problematic relationships, a higher incidence of mental health problems, they might drop out of school.  Because a healthy involved relationship with both parents is one of a child's basest needs.  Yes, schedule changes may cause some whining and temper tantrums at first - but it's something a child can adjust to.  Not having an involved relationship with one of their parents is not.

'I used to think that 50/50 physical was not good in any case.  I have since learned that kids are individuals.  One can't make a claim that kids' do better with equal access to their parents and have it be accurate 100% of the time.  Just like one can't make a claim that children do better when it isn't equal and have it be accurate 100% of the time.

When both parents are healthy and supportive it is true that kids do better with equal access 100% of the time.  It is also true that kids do better with two not-so-great parents than with one good parent, or no parents.  There are lots of studies to support this.

The presumption of shared custody also removes the reward aspect of a custody dispute.  If people know going in that they're going to have to share custody there is no monetary reward (CS) to fight over, there is no control aspect to fight over, and there is no way to punish your ex for the demise of the relationship by taking the kids away.

Your kid and my kid are perfect examples of that.  You had a child who handled it well.  I have a child who wouldn't have been able to.  Maybe, if my ex's schedule improves, that may change in the future.  But right now, 50/50 is not in MY kid's best interest.  And not because of my ex's schedule, but because of my kid's personality and emotional maturity.  Which is improving as she gets older.

If it's not because of your ex's schedule, then why would you say "Maybe, if my ex's schedule improves, that may change in the future."  Oh, what a tangled web we weave...

Uh, I don't recall stating that my kids' had a bad relationship with my ex.  They don't.  And the reason for that is because they weren't thrust into something that they couldn't handle.

Saying that your kids would be the "losers" if they had more time with their dad means that you don't see a benefit to their relationship with him.

I am the primary parent, it doesn't really matter if you like that terminology or not.  It simply is.

Ah, but you're not.  Whether or not you allow your ex to share equality in the raising of his and your children, he is just as important as you.  You might fool yourself into thinking he's not because you have the kids more than he does - but he is.  You'll see that when your kids are older.  Unfortunately.

BTW, parenting is rarely equal.  Even in intact families.

The only people who are concerned with this are the ones who want to diminish the other parent's importance and role in their child's life - by pointing out to anyone they can that they're the "primary parent".  That's doesn't make you any more important in the eyes of your children - although they may tell you that since it's quite obviously something you're concerned with.

You know, I have to consider after reading everything you have to say, that the reason your ex doesn't try to get more time with your kids is because you would fight him tooth and nail on the issue.  Courts are known to be po-mother, and lawyers can get real pricey, real quick.  Many people aren't going to take a $10K gamble with those kinds of odds.

You even say that you have to "suck it up" if he goes to one of your kids events.  You've been split for 5 years, you're the "primary parent", he has limited time with them... what are you "sucking up", besides dislike that your kids father is there.

[MixedBag]

You even say that you have to "suck it up" if he goes to one of your kids events.  You've been split for 5 years, you're the "primary parent", he has limited time with them... what are you "sucking up", besides dislike that your kids father is there.

bingo!

[Momfortwo]

Momfortwo...do not feel sorry for my children, unlike your children, mine are emotionally stable because I do not reflect my insecurities onto them.

I, but I do feel sorry for them.  They have a parent who jumps to conclusions without even knowing the kids he's jumping to conclusions about.

My kids are emotionally stable.  I know that you would like to think differently, but that's your problem.  Not my kids'.

[Momfortwo]

Believing that your children will learn to adjust to their new schedule does not mean that you think your child is a robot.

He's projecting how his kids handled his situation onto my kids.  Kids he has never met.  He can believe all he wants.  But his belief isn't based on facts.  It simply can't be because he DOESN'T KNOW the kids involved. 

Kids do adjust to changes in their schedule.  For example - their schedule is changed at least five times a year when they either start or stop going to school because of holidays.  That is a change in their schedule - and one that everyone expects that they will do just fine with.  In many places kids spend the night at school, and they adjust to it and grow up normally.  In some instances children move often due to their parents work.  They also do just fine.  With the proper emotional support, and teaching the child how to deal with the new situation, children will do fine with just about any schedule.

Some kids adjust, some don't.  Making a blanket statement that ALL kids will is not factual.

There is a difference between knowing that something may upset the child and teaching them how to deal with that situation, and trying to sheild them from it.  Change is a very big part of life, and I think that sheltering kids from it has a negative effect on their ability to mature emotionally.

Yes, change is a very big part of life.  And the older the kids is, the better they are able to handle it. 

My kids are now older than they were 4 years ago.  The way my ex and I handled was to take HER EMOTIONAL well-being into consideration.  Which meant no 50/50 physcial and backing off on a whole week-end away from me.   And it worked.  She went from not wanting to see her dad to running happily to him when he comes to get her.  There is nothing wrong with respecting a child's feelings.  It is the child who has to go back and forth, not the parents.

Of course your 3yo would be different when she came back from a weekend with dad - because her dad (and not only you) is having an impact on her because he is helping to raise her.  To be opposed to his influence on your child is quite telling.

You really like to jump to conclusions and not read what was posted.  I didn't say that she was different after a week-end with her dad.  I said that she became a completely different child.  And it was the WHOLE time.  A happy go lucky little girl was miserable the ENTIRE time.  Until we backed off and went more slowly.   By the way, that leap of yours about how I am opposed to my ex's influence on the kids really must have hurt.  Because it is simply not true. 

Thrust into something they couldn't handle.... unfortunately with divorce, there's a change no matter which way you look at it, and it's change that the children must adjust to.

Yes, they do.  And thrusting them into a whole lot of changes only adds to issues.  Going more slowly helps the children adjust better.  And this is coming from someone who has worked with young children for over 10 years. 

  Be it a new schedule at mom's house/dad's house, or having their relationship with one of their parents diminished.  To say that kids can handle losing a close relationship with one of their parents more than they could having to spend time at two different houses is pretty myopic.  You won't see the impact of the diminished relationship until the kids or older.  There are numerous studies out there to tell you what you can expect from your children when they are older:  adjustment difficulties into adulthood, problematic relationships, a higher incidence of mental health problems, they might drop out of school.  Because a healthy involved relationship with both parents is one of a child's basest needs.  Yes, schedule changes may cause some whining and temper tantrums at first - but it's something a child can adjust to.  Not having an involved relationship with one of their parents is not.

And those numerous studies don't say that ALL of the kids do well in a 50/50 physical situation.  Nor have those numerous studies studied every single child out there. 

And it was a whole lot more than whining and tantrums that was going on when we were going too fast with my youngest.

When both parents are healthy and supportive it is true that kids do better with equal access 100% of the time.  It is also true that kids do better with two not-so-great parents than with one good parent, or no parents.  There are lots of studies to support this.

And none of them state that 100% of the kids do well in the type of situation that you would force on them.  Nor have they studed every single child out there.  I know my kids better than those studies do.  They are doing well, both physically AND emotionally.  I know that doesn't jive with what you believe, but it simply is.

If it's not because of your ex's schedule, then why would you say "Maybe, if my ex's schedule improves, that may change in the future."  Oh, what a tangled web we weave...

My kids are getting older and are handling being away from me better.  The web that is being weaved here is by you.  With age comes emotional maturity.  If my ex's work schedule were conducive to 50/50, then I would consider trying more time to see how the kids handle it.  But it's not. 

Saying that your kids would be the "losers" if they had more time with their dad means that you don't see a benefit to their relationship with him.

That leap really hurt.  Saying my kids would be the losers if they were thrust into something that they simply couldn't handle is not saying that I don't see a benefit to their relationship with their dad.   It's saying that they would end up being the one who pays the price for some notion that they can't have a good relationship with their dad because it isn't 50/50.

Ah, but you're not.  Whether or not you allow your ex to share equality in the raising of his and your children, he is just as important as you.  You might fool yourself into thinking he's not because you have the kids more than he does - but he is.  You'll see that when your kids are older.  Unfortunately.

Ah, but I am the primary parent.  I know you don't like that but that is your problem not mine.  It simply is.  And has always been that way.  You may not like it, but it is.  It doesn't mean that he isn't as important as I am .  It simply means that I am the one who does most of the parenting.  And have since the day they were born.  You jumping to conclusions isn't going to change that.

You even say that you have to "suck it up" if he goes to one of your kids events.  You've been split for 5 years, you're the "primary parent", he has limited time with them... what are you "sucking up", besides dislike that your kids father is there.

Do you even understand what a hypothetical situation is?  Because I don't have to suck it up.  My ex and I actually are friendly and sit next to each other.  He also uses my house for the visits during the week.  I gave a hypothetical situation.  But I can see where you would think it isn't.  For one, I didn't state that it was hypothetical.  The other, is that you have a very strong bias against people you don't agree with.  Hence the reason you started this whole debate. 

[asof2005]

all i got to say is that if my step-sons didnt have 50/50 they would suffer for it.  the only reason we want full custody is for the decision making and to be a pillow for BM to fall on.  If we had full on paper we would leave the visitation 50/50.  because we definetly do not agree with BM's decision making, parenting, lifestyle, etc, but we know it is important for the boys to have a relationship with their mother.  CP's just like the control.  My DH is a better mother than the BM, but he is not considered CP by court standards.  if two parents live together have children together and then the father moves out after the divorce and gets every other weekend, i cant believe how that is good for the child to see their NCP only 4 days a month.  4 days out of 30-31, that is nothing to further a relationship on.   it ends up being a spoil fest for the NCP and being out of the loop with most of what is going on in their child's life.

[rjmurdock]

  Momfortwo you say your child couldn't handle a weekend away from you and if that is the case that represents an unhealthy dependency on you. My Ex husband had that same kind of relationship with his mother and now he can't function as an adult. The dependency that he had for his mother was equal to brainwashing it destroyed our marriage and has just about destroyed his relationship with his daughters. He is unable to make any decisions or do anything in his life without the approval of his mother. When we first split up we tried to do everything out of court. As hard as we tried his mother's interference eventually led to court ordered custody. When I filed for child support he had a DNA test done on his 8-yr old daughter because his mother told him she was not his (we were not married when she was born). Although his case is extreme if you continue with the attitude that your children can't stand to be away from you they will come to believe this leading to unhealthy relationships later on in life.

[gemini3]

I do understand a hypothetical situation.  I also understand that when someone says "I have no problems with me ex, and here's why... Another example, I suck it up and deal with the fact that my ex is there." they are not being hypothetical, they are giving an example.  But, maybe not in your world.

I also see through the way you're trying to twist other things you've said.  But I'm tired of pointing them all out, and I have no doubt that any other sane people might still be reading this ridiculous drivel can see it too.

I didn't start a debate momfortwo.  I asked a question.  One that, for all your quibbling, you still have not answered.  Which is why you're here.  This is a forum to promote shared parenting and equal access.  You've made it quite clear that you do not support share parenting and equal access.  My bias, and I agree that I have one against you, is because you're giving advice to people who are trying to get equal access - when you don't even support the idea.  Why?  You certainly aren't here because you want help co-parenting.  According to what you say, you and your ex are best buddies and never argue over anything.  So, if you care to answer... why are you here?