Mumsnet Talk

Looks like some people just want to see one side of an argument.
I'm a SM and a SC too.
There are good parents and bad parents, and lots inbetween. I'd suspect both good and bad parents are capable of missing their children when they are absent.
Good parents put their childrens needs first though.

I have had numerous clients who insist that their new partner is involved in contact from the word go, even if this is the person they had an affair with. Then they act all martyred if this proves difficult for the other parent to accept. Interestingly this does happen more with fathers and new girlfriends, at least in my experience.

Everyone needs to be much more sensitive, not stomping around demanding their 'rights'.

Ending a relationship is often very painful for all. If someone is behaving badly this might be a symptom of their pain, not simply that they are dyed in wool bastard/bitch. But I guess it is always easier to blame someone else than hold yourself to account.

'You want to waste time polarising the debate into Men Good, Woman Bad, knock yourself out.

People can be foul. It is not a gender issue.'

I've no idea what you're talking about, I've never said men good, women bad.

I made a comment that I think is true in Dadsnet.

And personally I think arguing on Internet forums is a total waste of time, but sometimes I have time to waste.

Daddelion in sure you're well aware that mn is not representative. It's a forum used predominantly by women for a start. Also people in happier relationships don't need to vent on a forum.
Posters chewing out awful partners has nothing to do with contact issues.

Sorry if I have misinterpreted your stance.

Arguing on Internet always waste of time, albeit sometimes fun.

But exchanging views and experiences, always worthwhile, especially if it makes someone stop and think even just a little. I think someof my clients just have no idea about the hurt and damage they cause by the way they chose to end their relationship and then the way they chose to 'fight' over contact thereafter.

I make a plea for less talk of rights and more recognition of responsibilities. I think a lot of people have given very cogent reasons why contact might have to progress more slowly than the non residentparent would like.

have they made they men they way they are

This is not possible, you cannot morph men into being a certain way ime and imo! Right up their in Fairytale land tbh!

Gay40 my exp wasn't a wanker till we had our 2nd child. I never had a crystal ball. If it makes you feel better I spend everyday feeling like shit cos I never predicted the future accurately.

A man can be a shite husband and a great dad. Similarly a woman can be a great mother and a shite wife. I think people often forget this.

Depends what you mean by 'shite'. If that includes being violent, abusive, contemptuous or dismissive towards the other parent then I feel very strongly that you cannot call yourself a good parent, no matter how brilliant you are in other areas. You are teaching your children some horrible behaviours/attitudes if you do that.

I think that if the mother has been the main career and the father moves out then it is a lot to expect of the children that they immediately accept a new situation at home, new situation in their relationship with parents, new house that dad is in ALL at once, so even for older children a gradual build up is important. It has nothing to do with how much the parents miss the kids.

If there is also an OW on the scene it can be ridiculous to expect kids to jump right into that situation and be happy.

Yes quite spero.
Gay40 the law recognises witnessing abuse in the way it recognises receiving abuse.

They could poison her tea and put ants in her bed I suppose and be sick all over her sexy nightie at 5am....

When both parents work fullt ime I don't see why fathers should not be forced to have the children 50% of thje time whether they like it or not.

In fact the fathers on here can answer me this - which of these reasons do you think is the one why so very many fathers choose to have no or very little to contact out of choice after divorce?
1. They are too lazy
2. They have a new woman which is more fun a way to spend time than wiping toddlers' bottoms.
3. Their precious little feelings are hurt and they cannot cope
4,. They feel useless
5. It costs money
6. They want to inconvenience the other parent?

Some other reason?

In my experience, both personal and professional it is very often 1 and 2, but I think all can apply.

STBExH proposed seeing the 3 dcs (aged 9m-7yrs) once a fortnight as, "I need to work on my new relationship with OW and her kids." [ouch] Otoh, he also suggested moving the OW into the family home with our dcs, so who knows.

To go back to the OP, I think his post is wrong (sorry!). It should say "why is it ok for a NRP to not have overnights with their children after separation but the RP couldn't cope with being apart from their children so access must be brought in gradually?*

It's all about dcs' security and a)getting used to seeing their parents not together but separately b)staying in an unfamiliar place. The fact is of course that mostly it is women left holding the baby and the man who moves out. And there are so many relationship variables - many dads are superbly hands-on, others are not - and also practical variables: when my dcs do a rare overnight with their father, dc1 bunks down on the floor in a sleeping bag but now that dc3 can climb out of his travel cot, STBExH much less keen to have them. And in my case it certainly isn't about affecting levels of CM as he pays none.

blue the difference between a mother with a newborn, and a "handsoff" uninterested father having a baby alone is that the mother is most likely going to be doing everything she can to look after that baby, having just carried it for 9 months and given birth, whereas the dad has already shown a lack of interest and care by being unbothered until they split, and then suddenly being desperate to play daddy. Seems more of a control thing in that situation than caring about the child IMO.

Obviously if a dad has been caring and involved, and the child is used to being settled by him equally at nights, then overnights should be introduced once the child has had a couple of visits to the new home to get used to it.

I used to be the one who did the feeds, changed my son's nappy and comforted him from birth through the night until his mother abducted him from his home without warning in the day while I worked.

After the court fight he was forced to see me in a contact centre because his mum wouldn't agree to anything else. I always remember the words out of the contact centre worker's mouth when I went to change his nappy:

`Do you think it's appropriate you do that?'

Despite having done nothing I felt like a child abuser.

There are just so many different variables. Like others have said, there are awful NRPs and awful RPs. There may be really valid reasons for children not going overnight, or absolutely no reason whatsoever. There may be step-parents involved anad having an influence - there was a thread the other day asking if it was necessary that step-children stayed overnight.

I love Xenia's post, I'd like to know what the answer is too! I offered 50:50 when I left, xh refused it. He could have loads of contact in the holidays, he never asks or says he can't.

I think some fathers miss their children as much as the mothers do, I also think there are some fathers who don't. DD's dad doesn't even bother to ring her between seeing her.