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.
I saw your post when you made it. I chose not to respond simply because I was not going to sink to your level of making things personal. People only make things personal when they have no way to make a valid point.
People are allowed to change their minds - they can even break a big ol' great promise if they want to. It sucks that you had a bad experience and that someone loved their child more than you - it happens. No need to take it out on the rest of the world.
And, no, I will not respond to you if you reply.
He-he, an easy way out, huh?! And yet you didn't answer the question, which in reality answers it!
And you really need to learn how to use the multi-quote function on this forum.
Here, I'll 'splain it to you. . .
As you read a thread and come upon a post that you'd like to reply to, but you are not finished reading the entire thread, there is a way to select that post to reply to later, while continuing to read the thread.
In the bottom right-hand corner of every post, immediately to the right of the 'quote' button, there is a button that looks like this:
When you click that button, it turns it orange, like this. . .
When you get to the end of the thread, click the button in the bottom left corner.
ALL of the posts that you have marked by clicking the button will appear in the reply box, already formatted with quote tags around each one. Just insert your replies under each one, OR, delete the ones you no longer want or need to reply to if they've already been addressed and/or corrected.
You two really need to read more carefully....she never said she was going to abandon her children (one of which is an adult). She's thinking of moving 11 hours away. The child was invited to go with her. (not a sign of abandonment) If I had a teenage son I'd rather he live with Dad. There are things about being a man Mom can't teach.
A mother who abandons her children goes away and never gives them a second thought....far from the case here.
Of course she wasn't intending to abandon her kids - but whether she intended it or not THEY would most likely FEEL abandoned
Again, it is our job as parents to do the very best we can for our kids - moving 11 or 12 hours away is not doing your best, unless it were absolutely necessary to actually be able to feed the child. Kids need ACCESS to their parents - especially since parenting is a hands on job, not something you can do over the phone.
Children are suppose enhance your life, not stop it.
My g-d, you make it sound like children are accessories, like a scarf or something. Children aren't supposed to enhance their parents' lives. What kind of gobble-de-ghook is that? Children are simply supposed to be and the parents who bring them into this world are supposed to raise them, not abandon them to the other parent to pursue their love lives. That's just absurd.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CESpeed
Life doesn't stop because you have children.
I don't believe anyone here said it does. But the primary focus of a parent's life should be their children, until they are no longer minors. And no, that doesn't mean catering to their every whim. That's why we've become a nation of brats. But it means making decisions with THE CHILD'S best interest foremost, NOT their own. And keeping a child in the same community as their non-custodial parent, who takes an active role in their lives and who from all accounts is not a deadbeat dad, but a man with a good relationship with his children, is the only correct decision to make for the well-being of the CHILD.
Schtooping can resume in 4 years. It ain't that long.
My g-d, you make it sound like children are accessories, like a scarf or something. Children aren't supposed to enhance their parents' lives. What kind of gobble-de-ghook is that? Children are simply supposed to be and the parents who bring them into this world are supposed to raise them, not abandon them to the other parent to pursue their love lives. That's just absurd. I don't believe anyone here said it does. But the primary focus of a parent's life should be their children, until they are no longer minors. And no, that doesn't mean catering to their every whim. That's why we've become a nation of brats. But it means making decisions with THE CHILD'S best interest foremost, NOT their own. And keeping a child in the same community as their non-custodial parent, who takes an active role in their lives and who from all accounts is not a deadbeat dad, but a man with a good relationship with his children, is the only correct decision to make for the well-being of the CHILD.
Schtooping can resume in 4 years. It ain't that long.
I'm sorry your life came to a screeching halt when you became a parent. The best parents are those with with happy fulfilled lives. She wasn't talking about shuttling the kid to a boarding school. He was going to live with his FATHER. Who is just as capable of raising a child as Mom is. (again) Living in close vicinity doesn't guarantee parental closeness. You are discussing geography and not a quality parenting relationship. Do you know how many children are abused because parents have put the child first? They ressent the child and view them as the reason they are unhappy. But you're right, let's force parents to sacrfice their lives and be unhappy for thier children, that works out real well.
I'm 35 years old. I have two children. One is 18 and the other is 14. I divorced their father - it was final this year. But about a year ago I met a man that I believe to be the true love of my life. He is 44. He also has a daughter that is 16. The problem - he lives in Canada and I live in Kentucky.
I decided after discussing with my kids and meeting him and spending time with him that I wanted to move to Canada to be with him. We planned on getting married. My daughter decided since she was of age that she didnt want to move there. My son decided that he would move there with me, then he changed his mind and decided he would rather stay in Kentucky with his other family and his Dad.
We wanted this to work out so badly. We both feel as if we are each others soul mate.
One problem is that I dont feel right about going to Canada with my kids and all my family here. But he doesnt want to leave Canada because he feels like it is a better country - safer and better opportunities than the USA.
I have been given advice from family and friends and its all conflicting. I can't make my kids move - I want them to be happy.
For the first time in 15 years I am truly happy with this man.
I would love for him and his daughter to move here with me, just until my son gets a little older.
I have tried staying in Canada, I came back to visit often, but this too is hard on all of us.
I have been out of work for about 6 months and I finally have a job opportunity in Kentucky and would like to work here and at least build up some funds.
But he doesnt want me to do that. He wants me to come back right away and we will get married in the Spring. At which time I would be able to work there.
When I told him I would like to work here for a few months, he said I just lost my man. //pics3.city-data.com/forum/images/icons/icon9.gif
Im so sad, hurt, disappointed, torn....any advice someone could give would be greatful.
Selena
Stay in Kentucky, get some time on the job, and let your 14 year old get thru highschool. People are too unpredictable these days.
I'm sorry your life came to a screeching halt when you became a parent. The best parents are those with with happy fulfilled lives. She wasn't talking about shuttling the kid to a boarding school. He was going to live with his FATHER. Who is just as capable of raising a child as Mom is. (again) Living in close vicinity doesn't guarantee parental closeness. You are discussing geography and not a quality parenting relationship. Do you know how many children are abused because parents have put the child first? They ressent the child and view them as the reason they are unhappy. But you're right, let's force parents to sacrfice their lives and be unhappy for thier children, that works out real well.
And leaving him to live with his father while she traipses off to follow "the love of her life" deprives him of her immediate presence in his life, at an especially vulnerable time in his development.
Do I know how many kids are abused by parents who put their children before themselves? Uhm, the answer would be NONE. You mistake parents who "stay together for the sake of the children", or who treat their children with resentment instead of love, or who are hateful and nasty to each other even after divorce, for "parents who put their children before themselves." Parents who do that are still not putting the well-being of their children first, their claims to the contrary notwithstanding.
People who elect to bring children into this world have committed themselves to the obligation of raising them until adulthood. Any parent who abdicates that responsibility to go off to shag someone, even if they still leave that child with the other parent, is an IRRESPONSIBLE PARENT.
And go roll your eyes at someone else. You aren't impressing anyone here with that childishness.
Living in close vicinity doesn't guarantee parental closeness. You are discussing geography and not a quality parenting relationship. Do you know how many children are abused because parents have put the child first? They ressent the child and view them as the reason they are unhappy. But you're right, let's force parents to sacrfice their lives and be unhappy for thier children, that works out real well.
Oh my gosh. How can you have a quality parenting relationship IF YOU'RE NOT THERE????
And if parents are abusing their kids because they put themselves first, then they obviously don't understand the job they've taken on by having them. If they resent the kid because they're unhappy (wah!!!), they're actually blaming the kid for the choices they themselves have made and refuse to acknowledge they f'ed up all on their own. That doesn't justify shipping your kid off to someone else so *you* can be happy. Well guess what, *your* (the parent's) happiness comes in 2nd after the kids. And it's their own responsibility, not the kids'. It's the parent's job to make their own "happiness" and not at the kids' expense.
I'm sorry your life came to a screeching halt when you became a parent. The best parents are those with with happy fulfilled lives. She wasn't talking about shuttling the kid to a boarding school. He was going to live with his FATHER. Who is just as capable of raising a child as Mom is. (again) Living in close vicinity doesn't guarantee parental closeness. You are discussing geography and not a quality parenting relationship. Do you know how many children are abused because parents have put the child first? They ressent the child and view them as the reason they are unhappy. But you're right, let's force parents to sacrfice their lives and be unhappy for thier children, that works out real well.
No offense, but I think your work with abused and neglected kids has greatly colored your perspective on this subject. But then I'm sure the kind of parents you know of first hand in your work would do that.
The point is, as I stated before, a kid DESERVES and NEEDS two parents - not just mom, not just dad. Unless mom REALLY had to go 11 hours away for a life or death reason, staying in the same area her child is in is for the best, no question about it. Parenting is a hands on job - you can't just "phone it in".
Oh my gosh. How can you have a quality parenting relationship IF YOU'RE NOT THERE????
And if parents are abusing their kids because they put themselves first, then they obviously don't understand the job they've taken on by having them. If they resent the kid because they're unhappy (wah!!!), they're actually blaming the kid for the choices they themselves have made and refuse to acknowledge they f'ed up all on their own. That doesn't justify shipping your kid off to someone else so *you* can be happy. Well guess what, *your* (the parent's) happiness comes in 2nd after the kids. And it's their own responsibility, not the kids'. It's the parent's job to make their own "happiness" and not at the kids' expense.
Letting a child's FATHER raise him isn't "shipping him off" or having happiness at the kid's expense. Doesn't Dad share any responsibility for the child he helped create?
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.
button in the bottom left corner.
