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.
Location: Subconscious Syncope, USA (Northeastern US)
2,365 posts, read 2,148,041 times
Reputation: 3814
Mothers are the primary caregiver. Most men dont equally share in the responsibility of feeding and cleaning children. Both parents may work, but the mother carries the child alone, and in many cases does everything nurturing for the child alone.
All children are attached to their mother, although they want both parents love and influence. Its a rare day you find a child that would prefer their parents get a divorce.
I saw a divorce case once where the woman was pregnant at the time, and wanted an abortion. The father sued for his right to the child, but lost in court. The woman was allowed to kill his child. That to me is wrong. She didnt make that baby by herself. There was no equality in that case.
Men paying child support have a right to see their child. For the sake of the child, even if the man fell on hard times, he should still be able to see his child, and the mother should want him to. Too often, children are just pawns in a game of control. If that should happen, men should just put the money in a seperate account, and wait for the mother to sue him in family court, or even innitiate the suit himself.
I know this sounds more like a landlord/tenent thing to do, but even adults can become selfish and childish.
EDIT: In some states, at a certain age, a child can deside for themselves who they wish to live with.
Last edited by ConeyGirl52; 04-14-2015 at 05:50 AM..
As a man, one thing I am terrified of is getting a divorce and not being with my kids. The courts are set up to where the woman gets the kids by default unless she is a complete mess ie drugs, no job, mental, etc.
If a woman simply files for divorce for anything other than something very serious ie abuse, infidelity, ect than the man should have the option to keep the kids. Same with the man in regards to the mother keeping the kids.
what really bothers me most, and I'm a woman, is the way women use the courts and the children to suck the man dry financially.
it happened to my brother in law. He was married to a woman who did nothing but buy, buy, buy.
the kids had to be in the best of everything, including herself....
well, he met my sister in law....they fell in love and got married...so he had two kids, and my sister in law and he had two...but until those kids were 21, that woman sucked him dry and was constantly taking him back in court, made me sick.....
and yes, I agree....why not get joint custody.
What you do, is, you move into the school district where they go....
You fight for joint custody
the kids are with you part of the week and with their mother part of the week....or by the month, whatever you both decide on? And you can alternate holidays....
I believe a child needs both parents....and men are perfectly capable of caring for the children the way the mother does....
what I don't suggest is this:
Way to many people who seperate, and divorce, jump right back into the dating scene and pick the first mate who comes along.
Don't do that...please, the children have to come first....
Make certain, your good with who you are, and don't need a date to go somewhere....
Make certain you own the mistakes you made for the marriage failing....and honestly own up to what you did wrong.
Don't put the blame on her...when you do that, you won't grow mentally....and you need to grow/mature...
I am advocating for a 50/50 physical custody in all divorces (except for rare exceptions), you are advocating to violently remove one parent from a child's life as a matter of standard operating procedure. I ask you and anyone else that may be listening- who is the biased one here?
Please, I invite you to quote the post where I said anything remotely like that. I invite anyone else reading this to do the same.
I most certainly did NOT infer it. I specifically and clearly attacked the argument as opposed to the arguer. As to the phrase 'ad hominem', why would I retire a phrase that so accurately describes what you did? Again, you called me a mysoginist. This is a blatant ad hominem attack. Why are you refusing to admit what you did and why are you refusing to apologize to the good people of city-data for breaking the TOS?
Assuming this is true, why punish the child by violently removing one parent from their lives as a matter of policy?
No one is violently removed. Most parents agree on things in a civil manner. Even when custody cases end up in court there is usually a prior arrangement on where the child should live until things are hashed out.
I am advocating for a 50/50 physical custody in all divorces (except for rare exceptions), you are advocating to violently remove one parent from a child's life as a matter of standard operating procedure. I ask you and anyone else that may be listening- who is the biased one here?
The problem with 50-50 physical custody is when a child is in school, then the parents must live in the same school zone for the child to go to his/her school 5 days per week.
My son and his ex-wife live in the same subdivision, but the school will not allow his children to get off the school bus in two different locations despite the fact that this is the same bus. Now he does have one day a week along with every other weekend and often he has more time on the weekends by agreement with his ex. If you divorce and are a parent, you need to work out the agreement in a way that is best for both the child and the parents. During the school year, my son has a bit less time than he does in the summer. However, even during the school year, he has 4 days some weeks and 1 day other weeks. And, he often takes them out to dinner on other days. In his case, his ex-wife is currently not working, she is finishing her school so she can work though.
If mom and dad don't live close to one another, the fact is that 50/50 physical custody is not going to work. I don't think the mom should be the default for physical custody, but it does depend on the age of the children, the person who will be able to do the job of getting the kids breakfast and to school, etc.
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.
