Do women really want 50-50 childcare?

[Truckrelented]

I'll be open from the outset I am a man, who used to post regularish but I've been off here for a while.

I am a father that has shared residency of our children, but with the threads I've read recently and conversations in real life I don't see a lot of interest in this.

Now I would have thought this was the way to equality as it enables both parents to carry on working and be independent and to have equal involvement in their children's lives.

But it seems that would be preferred is the father to see the children every-other-weekend, pay his maintenance (in whatever way it was agreed) and pretty much be a McDad.

Is that really what people want?

well me and dh are together and not planning on splitting up but we both work shifts and unsocial hours so share childcare 50 50 work opposite to each other if we were to split up i feel this would continue to enable us both to carry on working and for usto both careequally forour kidsfor me personally if i wasto say to my boys paticularly my oldest you can only see daddy once a week for a few hours he would be devastated everybodys different however

It depends on so many things. It's not as simple as asking women what they want.

Nooka.

We split all the costs equally and split the child benefit.
So we don't have a maintenance agreement either.

But technically one of us is a NRP, whoever has the child benefit in their name is the RP. So one of us could be classed as not paying the other.

NRP should pay. But each case is individual.

Truck - I think that you are right when you say that society is not geared to 50/50 childcare. I would imagine that logistically, it can be quite difficult.

More than anything though, I would think that this is simply an indictation of how society does not value child-rearing, and that at work, it's simply a pita to have an employee that needs to think about their child care.

It's a shame, that a parent can only really parent, when they either have another parent at home to take the load, or if they allow their career to suffer. Because work, society, employers, are not prepared to make allowances.

It is a well established principle that maintenance rates are affected by contact. Under CSA rules, maintenance can be reduced if the child spends a certain number of nights at the NRPs house. The reduction is higher the more nights a child spends with the other parent. Therefore in cases of 50/50 it will not apply.

I think "Pfft* is completely right. Childcare is devalued in this country and working practices are very geared against primary carers. One of the big reasons women end up being the primary carer by default is simply because it's a continuation of her maternity leave. Until paternity leave matches maternity leave, nothing much will change.

Another reason is cost of childcare. For many people it is prohibitively expensive. Therefore, the decision is taken that one parent stays at home. This is nearly always the woman (because she's already on maternity leave and because she is the lower earner). The introduction of massively subsidised childcare would help to change this. Some parents love the role of SAHP and they perform a very important function. Sadly, many more feel trapped in this role and would love to work if childcare were available and affordable. Closing the gender pay gap may also affect things by making more women the primary earner. And having more women at work instead of being SAHMs would further decrease the gender pay gap since a lot of it is thought to result from women's careers being sabotaged by taking a break to care for children.

There will be exceptions where both parents really want to reverse the traditional roles for whatever reasons, but it will take major legal changes before things change significantly I think.

Some women want their children with them 100% of the time.

Some would prefer to have them 99%-51% of the time.

Some would like things to be exactly 50-50

Some would want their children 49-1% of the time

And it's possible that there are some who would like to jack the whole thing in and have their children live with them 0% of the time.

Any question that asks "Do women want X?" is doomed to never be answered.

We have an amicable-ish arrangement, XH has them one week night and one weekend night.

He doesn't pay maintenance anyway, so that wouldn't be affected, but his home is not set up for 50-50 residence - this is their home. I have 100% responsibility for them, just as I did when we were married, and I imagine that will continue.

I would like him to have them more, but between work and him I feel like I barely see them anyway.

PS, I don't grieve or miss them much - they are having a great time with their dad! And I get to go out and do my combined hobbies of playing music and drinking beer, this is a good thing.

I did 50/50 with DD and was officially the NRP - i.e. her dad claimed the CB. It worked OKish and has enabled her to maintain a close relationship with us both but she didn't really enjoy all the to-ing and fro-ing, especially once she reached secondary school and had loads of stuff to cart about. It also made it more difficult for her to maintain a social life.

She's 19 now and is moving back in with me full time for the first time since she was 3

Sunshine.

If the children live 50-50 the RP can still claim CSA.
It's just a reduction. It's halved and then a reduction of £7 per child.
So if it was calculated at a £100 a week for one child, if they did 50-50 the parent who doesn't claim the child benefit would pay £43 a week.

And only one parent can claim tax credits. And if there is only one child only one parent can claim. But parents can claim for a child each.

And my Op was worded poorly, it would have better to say.

What do mums on MN want? And then see the responses.

I thinkit must be awful and unsettling for the child to have their life divided in half.All the time they won't have 50% of their stuff.

Fairydoll, it was my child who wanted 50/50 contact and shes never been more settled in her life so please don't lump my child into your thoughts. And she does have her 'stuff' 100% of the time. She has 'stuff' at her dads as well as here. She is always with her 'stuff'.

As if 'stuff' is what matters anyway.
As someone has already said every family/mum/dad/child/situation is different.
We were 50-50 between my mum and dad and were very happy to see them both regularly and not feel that one was rarely there or starting a new life in which we were a footnote.
It certainly wasn't 'awful' or 'unsettling'.

Geezakiss ' it was my child who wanted 50/50 contact '
..or trying hard to keep you both happy!

Fairydoll, you can try and twist it all you like to suit you're own agenda. It won't work, you don't know my child from Adam, we went along with what made OUR child happy, our own happiness took second place, seeing our child so happy and settled MADE us happier than ever. I know it might be hard for you to believe as you probably can't see past your own opinion but in a lot of cases 50/50 contact is the best option, not for everyone, but it is for my DD and for us as her parents. There is a lot more than life than 'stuff'.

fairydoll, there are children who are so close to their dads &and their mums that they would not be able to even pretend to be happy if one parent was shunted out of their lives

I would certainly have been one of them: I needed my dad; nothing could have unsettled me more than taking him away from my everyday life

my experience is that this works well in a situation where both parents are prepared to make an easy transition for the child their first priority

for some reason, this appears to be not uncommon in Sweden, where people are often fairly pragmatic about things anyway and children have a very high priority

Hmm. I was going to come back to this thread and make a long drawn-out post and then I thought "Sod it! It's completely pointless." TrillianAstra is right. There are just too many variables to answer this question with a yes or no.

In my own case I would love love love to have a decent XP who could do 50/50 with me. While I am quite a happy contented person in RL and I love my children and consider them the best thing I have done with my life, having 100% of the responsibility (practical, emotional and financial) is hard and sometimes overwhelming, and it has come at the cost of my career. Even if I were prepared to give my XP 50/50 he wouldn't take it.

Then there's a man I know who is currently taking his XP to court to get residency because he has concerns about their mother's drug use.

You couldn't get two situations more different.

You can, I suppose, talk about general patterns, but even then you have to apply a whole set of "ifs" for it to carry meaning. For example, IF

• childcare were free
• paternity leave was the same as maternity leave
• the gender pay gap did not exist
• abuse is not an issue
• child benefit and tax credits were split between parents to reflect residency arrangements...

Only then can you really ask if 50/50 is what women really want.

'unfortunately all the way along it has seemed to me that his 50:50 obsession has been about him not being seen to miss out. he doesn't want me to have something that he doesn't have. so demanding that the children are in his house (10 miles from school) being looked after by the nanny for 3 hours before he returns from work, when i am working from home 2 mins from the school and could see them for an hour after school before they return to his house. it is specifically about me not having something that he can't have. he even said that the reason he was adamant that there had to be equality of care (when there never had been before when we were together) was that he didn't want the children to have more exposure to me because then they might decide on that basis that they wanted to live with me.'

WishIWasRima, I could have written that word for word.

Where men want power over their kids (and their ex) they will use 50:50 to get it. the Australian research sadly backs that up. I also fully understand your opinion that perhaps leaving your (abusive) xH wasn't worth it in the end because you suffer more now.

I also entirely agree with you that separation and divorce have been the worst ever thing to happen to me in my life and although I didn't love xH and it was over in many ways I think the kids and I might have been better off in a sham marriage for the next 10 years, than this... I am nowhere near recovering, 2 and a half years after the split, cry every time I hand the children back, all evening....and have ended up agoraphobic and with OCD among other things. Luckily for my children, they do not have the separation issues you do as before our split xH was very involved (when he was there) and an excellent dad. He was also never abusive before I left (he hated me for leaving... hence all the aggression afterwards) but was always very quietly controlling and overpowering. He is extremely successful and expects to 'win'. So, I find myself still controlled and over powered to the extent that I dont' know how much more I can take and am thinking of stepping back and giving him full residence so at least the kids don't have to see me so depressed all the time.it's so, so hard and I wouldn't wish it on anyone.

AG - this is so hard. i would really urge you NOT to make any decisions over residence until you have had some help with your depression. i can understand how you want to spare the kids seeing you depressed; but your kids do need you. they need a mother who is well. unfortunately, you can't take time to get well and then resume your relationship with them, because your xH will have residency by then and there is no going back then. so please try and hang on in there while you get some help with your mental health.

If DH and I were to split I would like to have 50/50. The truth is, certainly at toddler I age, I don't feel I could do 80% of it on my own, DD has a fantastic relationship with her dad and would be distraught if she wasn't able to see him often.

But then if DH were to move away from where I was settled... life would get a lot more complicated.

I did 50/50 when my parents split. I hated it, as did my brother.

I am currently going through a terrible court battle with my ex - hes currently having no contact with son as son is bed wetting / nightmares / locking himself at school to stay away from his dad, but in the event that CAFCASS solve this problem for us, and son and XP sort their relationship out and we eventually end up making contact work, i would honestly consider being the NRP rather than 50/50 because I hated it so much. I only did it to keep my parents happy.

OCDspecialist - horrid situation. you do need to make some decisions, but i really hope you can hold off making them until you can get some help. you need to get yourself into a position where you feel like you have control over what is happening - which probably sounds ludicrous now. but your ex is controlling you still; your situation is hemming you in; and now you are controlled by OCD also. you do have some big decisions to make, but you need to make them with clarity of mind. if you can get your head into a better place, you can then formulate a plan with regards to living and working. you may find it becomes obvious to you what you need to do when you feel more in control of your situation. at the moment, anxiety, fear and stress is backing you into a corner...

fallenninja - i would hate my kids to feel like you and your brother felt. for all that X is arrogant and bullish, i do hope that, when the children are bigger, he listens to what they have to say about the arrangements. at the moment, they are too little to express an opinion. i know that i read too much into every aspect of their behaviour at the moment. equally, at present he only cares about DS - literally.

I would have preferred 50/50 as we both work full time. Instead I have the 5 chidlren 365 days a year and pay for everything as I earn 10x more and paid out on my divorce too. If there were a 50/50 presumption where both work full time and unless the parents agree otherwise or the court orderse otherwise it woudl be fairer for men, children and working mothers particularly where the parents can each afford a house rather than the father (or mother ) sleeping on his parents' sofa.

Xenia- how shite. Why on earth does xH not see his children at all? Does he just not bother??