Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your thinking is screwed up! Because they were married she worked for him? BS, turn it around, he worked for her. The deal agreed upon? Come on, this is real life, it's not high school. A deal is a bunch of words, surely not something to stick a person, man or woman for thousands of dollars of support. What if a husband got killed and couldn't work, would his widow be paid by someone just because she didn't do any planning and has no skills? A man can advance in his career without a woman running a household, and why is it that she is running the household for him, why not herself? Your polluted ideas don't hold water. Because two people spend 30 years together doesn't mean one has to support the other if they break up. If the shoe were on the other foot, you would feel entirely different. Woman's lib is fine until you apply the principles, or until they affect you.
Actually that's exactly what marriage means in most cases.
Courts didn't reduce men to paychecks, men did that to themselves. They don't want to spendtime with their kids, influence them or protect them, they want to hurry up and find the next piece of a$$. (and of course that is a generalization, not every man.)
I don't think that regular joes should have so much money taken that they don't have enough to live on. But I'm talking strictly necessities, not 40 in plasma TV's, and weekends spent in the bar.
Good morning,
Men who DO want to spend time with their kids shouldn't have to suffer because of the decisions of other men.
Even if a man does want custody, the stats show (and attorneys in the field say) he will still have a very tough time obtaining it.
Custody should start as a presumption of 50/50 and then if people turn it down, they should pay child support. It shouldn't be an automatic rewarding of custody to one parent.
Courts didn't reduce men to paychecks, men did that to themselves. They don't want to spendtime with their kids, influence them or protect them, they want to hurry up and find the next piece of a$$. (and of course that is a generalization, not every man.)
I don't think that regular joes should have so much money taken that they don't have enough to live on. But I'm talking strictly necessities, not 40 in plasma TV's, and weekends spent in the bar.
In many many cases they most certainly do. As much (or more) as there are fathers that dont care to spend time with thier kids, there are fathers that are prevented anything more than everyother weekend at best and when the mothers defy that the authorities and family court never enforce it. And after years of hurt, betrayal and spending money on attorneys they become beat down by the system and heartbroken at having to watch their children drug in and out of court and being used like pawns in a game so they just give up.
Location: Currently I physically reside on the 3rd planet from the sun
2,220 posts, read 1,877,655 times
Reputation: 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom123
Good morning,
Men who DO want to spend time with their kids shouldn't have to suffer because of the decisions of other men.
Even if a man does want custody, the stats show (and attorneys in the field say) he will still have a very tough time obtaining it.
Custody should start as a presumption of 50/50 and then if people turn it down, they should pay child support. It shouldn't be an automatic rewarding of custody to one parent.
Thanks! I have met many men who very much want to have a relationship with their children but have literally been disenfranchised by the courts. It is also painful to maintain a relationship with a child when you have been relegated to a paycheck/weekend visitor and meet resistance whenever you attempt to exercise parental authority.
I have never heard that second idea but I think it makes wonderful sense. Start out with the assumption of 50/50 and go from there.
As for the general attitude of deadbeat dads or the assumption that men just walk away from their children or don't care I would remind people of the adage about walking in anothers shoes before judging.
Thanks! I have met many men who very much want to have a relationship with their children but have literally been disenfranchised by the courts. It is also painful to maintain a relationship with a child when you have been relegated to a paycheck/weekend visitor and meet resistance whenever you attempt to exercise parental authority.
I have never heard that second idea but I think it makes wonderful sense. Start out with the assumption of 50/50 and go from there.
As for the general attitude of deadbeat dads or the assumption that men just walk away from their children or don't care I would remind people of the adage about walking in anothers shoes before judging.
Good afternoon,
Part of the problem is the good dads have lost the PR battle. Not only have the deadbeats taken up most of the press, but many of the good ones who lost the fight simply suffer in silence or sometimes the ex paints her own version which makes her look rosy, and is accepted by the public.
Also, as 2mares said, there is the fatigue factor where these guys lose so much energy, time and finances trying to fight that they give up. I've seen great fathers AND even some mothers give up when I was trying to push them to keep going despite being on the losing side. Many observers might say they would never give up, but unless one is in this ordeal, they have no idea how much losing a child affects them mentally and some give up for the sake of peace and sanity.
I wish we could separate deadbeats from those who want to be more than part-time fathers in the public debate. Too many outside commentators want to lump them in the same category and turn a blind eye to the ones relegated to "every other weekend" against his wishes.
To be clear, I hate deadbeats and sympathize with (and have personally helped) women who really want true shared (50/50) custody with the father, but that's not what's being discussed here.
I don't know where you guys live, but where I live, if you don't follow the court ordered visitation, the cops will show up and escort you away in cuffs while the other parent gets the kids. As long as you have your paperwork of course.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom123
Good afternoon,
to the ones relegated to "every other weekend" against his wishes.
What else besides weekends would there be? Do you really want kids being shuffled back and forth during the week, or even every other week? That might be ok for babies, but once kids are in school this is an extreme hardship, I know, I've been there. Homework, clothes and other needed items get left behind. (Maybe others are better organized than me and my ex though LOL.)
Divorce sucks any way you look at, even more so when there are kids involved. Just today a girl at work asked me if her ex should be allowed to keep the kids all weekend when he decided to move into a one bedroom apartment. They have 3 kids together, 1 boy and 2 girls. And the 3 of them have to sleep on the living room floor together. They are between 10 and 14 years old. So now because he wants to save a buck, the kids have to feel even more like outsiders at his house, at one of the most akward times in their lives developmentally.
I think it is absurd that the woman is always given custody. The father has to prove complete incompetence to get custody in most cases. And even then it doesn't always work. Been there to with my younger sister. My mom got custody of her and now my sister is a screw up. A knocked up druggie at age 15. I truly believe it's because my mom had custody of her. Why would a judge give a woman a 4 year old when both the 15 and 17 year old refused to live with her? Because they don't think men can take care of kids. I think it is harder on men to take care of young kids, but most of them have help from women they know. Moms, sisters, friends girlfriends. (I don't know any men that actually want their kids full time though. They can barely do weekends)
Most people are so stuck on getting even with their ex they don't see/care how much they are hurting their kids. It's really sad.
Location: Currently I physically reside on the 3rd planet from the sun
2,220 posts, read 1,877,655 times
Reputation: 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1phwalls
I don't know where you guys live, but where I live, if you don't follow the court ordered visitation, the cops will show up and escort you away in cuffs while the other parent gets the kids. As long as you have your paperwork of course.
I belong to some fathers rights groups and have met men who have had thier children illegally taken from the state they live in. Yea, sure they can fight it as they continue to pay alimony, child support and existing attorney fees. The fight can last years, cost 10s of thousands of dollars and in the end not amount to a hill of beans.
I have met men who have travelled cross country for a holiday to see their children with the ex's consent to be turned away at the door. Sure they can throw a fit, argue and demand to see their children. They can also wake up in jail with more legal bills and battles in front of them.
I have met men who have been accused of DV, mental illness and abandonment who in some cases are fighting to have access to children they haven't seen in years. One fellow hasn't seen his daughter in over 10 years and continues to battle. You may ask at what point it becomes moot since at 18 they can make their own decisions. He told me he will fight all the way to her 18th birthday so he can honestly tell her he never stopped fighting for her.
Could all these guys be lying?
Yea, sure they could, especially the ones with DV, Mental Health and Abandonment issues.
Before my divorce I probably would have just assumed they were.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1phwalls
What else besides weekends would there be? Do you really want kids being shuffled back and forth during the week, or even every other week? That might be ok for babies, but once kids are in school this is an extreme hardship, I know, I've been there. Homework, clothes and other needed items get left behind. (Maybe others are better organized than me and my ex though LOL.)
Yup. Hard? sure. Worth it? You bet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1phwalls
Divorce sucks any way you look at, even more so when there are kids involved. Just today a girl at work asked me if her ex should be allowed to keep the kids all weekend when he decided to move into a one bedroom apartment. They have 3 kids together, 1 boy and 2 girls. And the 3 of them have to sleep on the living room floor together. They are between 10 and 14 years old. So now because he wants to save a buck, the kids have to feel even more like outsiders at his house, at one of the most akward times in their lives developmentally.
I bust my ***** to maintain a 3 bedroom house for my children that live with me. Do I keep a 5 bedroom for the other two that don't. No. Frankly I can't afford to. I don't know this mans situation, but I'm not sure I would keep a 3 bedroom house much less a 5 bedroom house for my children if I were only allowed to see them every other weekend. As for he ex being allowed to keep them all weekend, why shouldn't he? He is their father isn't he?
When I first got my children for weekends before I got custody. I bought a tent and put it up in the living room. We slept in the tent in sleeping bags, watched movies till late and ate hot dogs and popcorn. I don't think they suffered too much for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1phwalls
I think it is absurd that the woman is always given custody. The father has to prove complete incompetence to get custody in most cases. And even then it doesn't always work. Been there to with my younger sister. My mom got custody of her and now my sister is a screw up. A knocked up druggie at age 15. I truly believe it's because my mom had custody of her. Why would a judge give a woman a 4 year old when both the 15 and 17 year old refused to live with her? Because they don't think men can take care of kids. I think it is harder on men to take care of young kids, but most of them have help from women they know. Moms, sisters, friends girlfriends. (I don't know any men that actually want their kids full time though. They can barely do weekends)
Hello, nice to meet you.
I do it 24/7 for two of my kids and yes, it is hard. You have no (explative) idea how hard it is. There's no help for men either. No social services, no legal aid, no baby sitting co-ops, subsidized housing etc.
As for barely doing weekends what is that exactly supposed to mean? That somehow we are incompetent to care for our children for even two whole days in a row? Maybe you are fella, but I've had strangers who don't know I'm a single father complement me on my girls behavior. I'm nothing special, I have friends who are also single fathers who have pretty awesome kids too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1phwalls
Most people are so stuck on getting even with their ex they don't see/care how much they are hurting their kids. It's really sad.
Thank you for noting most people.
One gender is not the hero or the villain.
One thing to remember too, is regardless of how much it sucks for you (mom or dad), it sucks way more for the kids who didn't do a damn thing to deserve this mess.
I don't know where you guys live, but where I live, if you don't follow the court ordered visitation, the cops will show up and escort you away in cuffs while the other parent gets the kids. As long as you have your paperwork of course.
You mean there is actually a place where authorities uphold court ordered visitation and parenting plans? WOW. I tell you in TN you might as well wipe your butt with them if you are a man. If you call the cops they will tell you it is a civil matter, get an attorney. $3500 for an attorney to file a contempt charge, 30 days to respond to contempt charge, wait for court date, Judge dosent give a crap. Back to square 1.
I am glad that overall you aren't biased in your post. That is refreshing since it's very uncommon for those who don't 100% agree with my positions on this topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1phwalls
I don't know where you guys live, but where I live, if you don't follow the court ordered visitation, the cops will show up and escort you away in cuffs while the other parent gets the kids. As long as you have your paperwork of course.
I am glad this works in Ohio (if your opinion isn't only based on what you've seen personally), but I can assure you this is not the norm, just do simple searches and you can see the general consensus that visitation is typically not enforced.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1phwalls
What else besides weekends would there be? Do you really want kids being shuffled back and forth during the week, or even every other week? That might be ok for babies, but once kids are in school this is an extreme hardship, I know, I've been there. Homework, clothes and other needed items get left behind. (Maybe others are better organized than me and my ex though LOL.)
To avoid leaving behind needed items, parents can either coordinate or if they aren't on speaking terms, they can buy their own needed items. This is not enough of a reason to deny one parent the ability to see their child as much as the other, especially if the person on the short end of the stick didn't even want to split up their family in the first place. Kids aren't so fragile that they can't live in more than one comfortable home each week.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1phwalls
Divorce sucks any way you look at, even more so when there are kids involved. Just today a girl at work asked me if her ex should be allowed to keep the kids all weekend when he decided to move into a one bedroom apartment. They have 3 kids together, 1 boy and 2 girls. And the 3 of them have to sleep on the living room floor together. They are between 10 and 14 years old. So now because he wants to save a buck, the kids have to feel even more like outsiders at his house, at one of the most akward times in their lives developmentally.
Other parents who CAN provide two homes with beds for each child shouldn't have to suffer because of anecdotes like this. If the parent in your example can't provide a decent home with the basics, that should be either remedied or this person shouldn't get custody.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1phwalls
I think it is absurd that the woman is always given custody. The father has to prove complete incompetence to get custody in most cases. And even then it doesn't always work. Been there to with my younger sister. My mom got custody of her and now my sister is a screw up. A knocked up druggie at age 15. I truly believe it's because my mom had custody of her. Why would a judge give a woman a 4 year old when both the 15 and 17 year old refused to live with her? Because they don't think men can take care of kids. I think it is harder on men to take care of young kids, but most of them have help from women they know. Moms, sisters, friends girlfriends. (I don't know any men that actually want their kids full time though. They can barely do weekends)
I am one of those guys who has had my child full time for almost his entire life (and 50/50 otherwise, which I pushed for since mom time is important). We do exist, we just don't make a lot of noise about it because it's our responsibility.
I know a lot of guys who wanted / want what I have, but aren't able to because the mother wants 100% custody. I am lucky, because if I were dealing with this kind of mother, I might have been one of those forced every other weekend type of dads. I realize that my situation of being able to work things out on paper without courts is the exception.
Either way, I appreciate that you aren't biased towards mother-preferred custody. Many people do seem to think that mothers are the only ones capable of raising children. If that were the case, single mother homes wouldn't be the main contributor to high poverty rates, imprisonment, and lack of education. I'm not saying women aren't capable, I'm simply saying both men and women are capable and the stats don't show these mother-preferred court decisions as warranted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1phwalls
Most people are so stuck on getting even with their ex they don't see/care how much they are hurting their kids. It's really sad.
I agree, which is why I call for fairness in these situations since people can't seem to work things out on their own.
As for barely doing weekends what is that exactly supposed to mean?
I was referring to people I know, not a making a generalization. Like my best friend who's boyfriend left when their baby was about 6 months old. He's seen her 3 times since then. She is now 13 years old. Or my ex who says, I'll be there in about an hour and shows up 5 hours later because he had to make some stops on the way. Nice to show your kids your buddy needing you to take him somewhere is more important that spending time with his kids like he said he would.
And the guy who moved into a one bedroom can afford 2 beds, his lease was up so he decided to move into a cheaper place just because he could. And yes, kids think it's cool to sleep in the living room watching tv all night (mine included). But kids also think it's cool to call people poopie face and do prank calls. It's not about what kids like, it's about what is best for them. If someone truly can't afford it that's a different story.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
