Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think it's unfair how women hold all the cards in a situation like this?

199 replies

chickendhansak · 17/11/2014 19:40

Yes I know there are plenty of deadbeat dads who don't step up, don't pay anything, barely see their DC, treat them as an inconvenience. Been there, got the tshirt etc.

But for the ones who do...the ones who want to spend as much time as they can with their DC, who pay all they should (and more), it still feel like they get the sticky end of the lollipop. Seeing the kids on Xmas and birthdays only if the XW agrees, missing out on all the everyday stuff because they can't see them every day. And having to the possibility when the XW starts a new relationship, of some bloke getting to spend more time with their kids than they spend with their own father.

I don't know what the solution is, I just think it's bloody hard, especially if it's the woman's decision to break up the family in the first place.

OP posts:
Wolfbasher · 19/11/2014 10:21

Also, at the DCs' private prep school/nursery there are a significant minority of dads who do pick-ups/drop-offs on certain days because they work shorter hours or not at all on those days. They all seem to have pretty good jobs.

enderwoman · 19/11/2014 10:38

I think it is easier to be flexible the more higher up the ladder you are. The dads I see doing the school run tend to be self employed or ace contacts where they can work from home for some of the week- which can work with school age children

Shenton · 19/11/2014 11:20

I would love 50/50 care a week on week off with my ex ... He wouldn't entertain it ... Would actually have to put his hand in his pocket, do day to day care and have the same issues in his career that I have ... Can you imagine how awful that would be .. Poor man

Bonsoir · 19/11/2014 11:26

I don't recognise the problems described by the OP. My DP and his exH had 50:50 shared care of their sons (my DSSs) for many years. Negotiating holiday dates etc wasn't easy but neither parent had an automatic upper hand.

Bonsoir · 19/11/2014 11:26

ExW, not exH

Original poster
chickendhansak · 19/11/2014 12:41

Lets clear up a few points. I rather suspect certain posters are deliberately shit stirring because they can't see a possibility that anyone other than a man is to blame for everything, but I'd like to have my say and set to rest various bullshit, badly informed assumptions that in fairness wouldn't occur if people stopped acting as armchair lawyers and/or RTFT.

DPs ex holds plenty of cards. She gets more time with the DC, and gets to make all day to day decisions unilaterally. She doesn't inform my DP of anything in relation to DC. He has said he would like to do his share of GP/dentist/healthcare appts. She won't tell him when they are as she prefers to take the DC herself. She won't let him see DC on their birthdays as those dates don't fall on his agreed contact days. He asked, she said no. He has asked to split Xmas and see DC on Boxing Day, but she won't discuss it. There is nothing in the court order re those specific dates, it was meant to be by negotiation but you can't negotiate if the other person won't discuss anything. Yes he could go back to court but that takes time and costs money. He doesn't have a lot of spare cash. Is it realistic to go back to court every time she won't keep him informed or discuss anything with him? Probably not.

The point is it feels very easy for her to cut him out of the DCs lives to a large extent, by just never communicating anything. The DC are so young that they can't pass on much info themselves. It is a very difficult and unpleasant situation. DPs greatest fear is if his X decides to relocate, as she has links to another part of the country and they had discussed moving whilst still married. He would then face having to find a new job, home, in order to stay nearby to the DC. Or be 100s of miles away. There's nothing he can do legally as it's not yet on the table (and even if it was, his X could probably persuade the court it was in the children's interests...). It's a horrible position to be in.

OP posts:
MonstrousRatbag · 19/11/2014 12:45

Not arguing with your specific circumstances, but your OP was a general one about how 'women' as a group hold all the cards. Which isn't true. If you wanted to complain or get advice about how things are for you and your DP personally, why not just do that from the outset?

Original poster
chickendhansak · 19/11/2014 12:50

On the work point: He does already work flexibly to collect and drop off DC on the days he has them (one day in the week he also has them at the weekend, 2 days the next week - when he doesn't have a weekend with them).

Could he drop to 4 days? In theory his employers might agree. In financial terms he couldn't afford it as it would be 1/5 of his salary lost. He wouldn't be able to increase his hours further as his employers only allow him to work a max of the equivalent of 1.5 hours extra per day. So there's no way of dropping to 4 days without dropping his salary, and getting into significant debt. He won't get a smaller house because he wants the DC to feel as at home with him as they do with their mother. They are different sexes so in future would not be able to share a bedroom anyway.

OP posts:
Original poster
chickendhansak · 19/11/2014 12:55

Because I do think generally women are in the position of advantage. I don't get a penny from my X, but I still acknowledge I'm in the better position. Not living with our DC he misses out on a lot of everyday stuff, that I would hate not to have.

My DC are the most important thing in my life, I would hate to be largely cut out and only get the information my X felt it worth passing on.

OP posts:
Starlightbright1 · 19/11/2014 13:03

I don't really see you point either. Most sperated parent I know that NRP is still involved do alternative christmas's .

I encourage anyone not to agree to EOW .

I am afraid the child who suffers most from these separations are the children.

My waste of space Ex was never offered christmas contact as he could barely be bothered to turn up for the contact so no MY DS was going to spend xmas with some who could put him first and wouldn't be passed out by lunchtime pissed.

Your post is full of stero types. Maybe write to the daily mail they would love your opinion

LineRunner · 19/11/2014 13:07

Is it a recent split, then, that your DP's days with his DC have never fallen on a child's birthday or Xmas?

Tbh to go back to family court to get alternate Christmas Days agreed, he could represent himself and it would just cost the one-off fee (couple of hundred quid max).

stubbornstains · 19/11/2014 13:23

I find that lots of men are very eager to tell you that they dote on their kids, and yearn to spend more time with them, but are obstructed by their evil ex.

Some are even telling the truth. Wink

itsbetterthanabox · 19/11/2014 13:33

Why not split Xmas and birthdays? So half the day with each. That's what I did as a child. I wouldn't want to miss seeing either of my parents on the day.
Eow= deadbeat dad.

Starlightbright1 · 19/11/2014 13:59

I want a like button for your post stubbornstains

Rebecca2014 · 19/11/2014 14:27

I be happy to give 50:50 care to my ex but he doesn't want it as he works all the time. I am sure one day very soon I be working full time, should I put my daughter in care at that point? No but because ex is an man he gets away with minimal time spent with his child and is called a super dad from other people because he actually sees his child.

MistressDeeCee · 19/11/2014 17:16

9 times out of 10 these matters are about the new partner simply blowing off steam, because the man is bending her ear about his ex - thats a red flag right there re. always on about ex but, anyway.. but no, some women prefer to buy into the ex is an evil witch nonsense rather than face up to the fact the man prefers to harp on, rather than try his very best to sort situation. & that there is a reason for that which may not be what she is thinking of. Its not the man that doesn't hold the cards here - its the OP.

This could easily be solved by him going back to court - see the children alternative birthdays/christmas or for 1/2 those days. Or are grown men believed to be somehow entirely incapable of working this out for self? Of course they can - if they want to. If they dont want to then, they won't. & it sounds to me as if thats what OP is dealing with here.

In that position a genuine person wouldnt be spouting off about is ex all the time he'd walk over hot coals to sort out access. Some NRPs really do need their bluff called...if ex says "ok you can have access" out will come the excuses as to why actually, they can't really find the time. Long working hours are usually thrown into the mix. As well as the ex being "inconvenient" about specific times.

The moaning and having exes name in his mouth any moment can then continue. The best OP can hope for is that he puts his money where his mouth is and goes back to court - no need to teach a grown man to suck eggs, is there? & that she is never in the position of being called the evil ex who disrupted his time with his children...

PuffinsAreFicticious · 19/11/2014 17:58

OP, you say your DP's ex chose to stop working when the children arrived. Are you saying that, without any discussion, she just handed her notice in? Or do you think it's more likely that they discussed it, and decided that her earnings didn't justify the childcare expenses, his career was so much better than hers and all the other little justifications couples use for a woman committing career suicide?

You DP has chosen to work FT, for reasonable reasons, but it is still a choice that he has made without reference to his ex. The consequences of that choice are that he spends less time with his children. He could change things, but he chooses not to. He has all the cards in his situation.

Sabrinnnnnnnna · 19/11/2014 18:26

In a marriage, when someone (usually the mother) becomes the sahp, they make a 'career sacrifice' - which is recognised in law should the marriage break down.

They are deemed to have sacrificed a job/career, and a certain amount of earning power, for the sake of the family, and for the sake of the earning partner.

There is a very good article about how a person is privileged to have a sah partner - who enables their career by doing all the domestic gruntwork - but I can't be arsed to find because op won't take a blind bit of notice. But yes, those people generally get residency of the children - and continue to do most of the domestic gruntwork (but probably on a lower income than before.)

hiddenhome · 19/11/2014 19:21

Do me a favour. We all know that the reason why men want 50/50 is so they don't have to pay child support Hmm

Mothers end up picking up the pieces time after time.

Coyoacan · 19/11/2014 19:36

One of the problems that your DP has, in common with all other UK residents is that going to court to solve these problems is mightily expensive as there is no longer any free legal aid in these cases.

This is just as awful for women as it is for men, IMHO.

Original poster
chickendhansak · 19/11/2014 19:37

That's a depressingly cynical and unpleasant view hiddenhome, what's the problem not getting as much money as you think you should from your X?

I scarcely think my DPs X is picking up the pieces. He didn't leave her, there was no affair, no abuse, she chose to separate because she didn't feel marriage and a family was enough. If there are pieces to be picked up, they are very definitely of her making.

OP posts:
hiddenhome · 19/11/2014 19:43

Oh, I would dearly love to hear her side of things OP Hmm

Been brainwashed long have we?

sjovt · 19/11/2014 19:45

Well, it was my "decision" to break up the family but that came after 8 years of being treated with no respect so in my x's case, I have zero sympathy for what he's lost. He lost it because he didn't value it.

micah · 19/11/2014 19:45

Pre divorce dh and his ex both worked full time, and dh did more than his share of the childcare, he loves kids :)

His ex had an affair, kicked him out with nothing, moved new bloke in, demanded he pay her spousal maintenance and Csa, which he did.

He got a solicitor to enquire about taking her to court to keep the kids with him. He was told unless he could prove her unfit (drink, drugs, abuse etc), then he wouldn't win. he was prepared to give up work or go part time (she would only do full time), whatever it took.

Courts always award residency of young children to the mother, unless she voluntarily agrees.

Sabrinnnnnnnna · 19/11/2014 19:57

what's the problem not getting as much money as you think you should from your X?

Well, for a start, if you are the resident parent, a drop in income affects the quality of life for the children.

Honestly. Do you think single mothers are spending their maintenance money on handbags and shoes? Or is it fags and scratchcards? What do you spend the majority of your money on? If you're anything like the divorced mothers I know, it is spent on the children - buying essentials for them, food, paying bills, keeping a roof over their head.

I can't believe you're so down on women tbh.