To ask if anyone else feels this was about their children..

[LokiBear]

I have one dd aged 3. My DH is a very hands on parent. We co - parent 50-50. Neither of us will make a decision without the other parent agreeing and we each have the power of veto. In terms of day to day care, we both work therefore we share everything, although I would say I probably do 60% compared to dh 40%. Anyway, to my question: some friends of ours have recently split and are involved in negotiations as to whom the children with live with. We were discussing how sad it was and dh said that it would kill him to have to be an 'every other weekend' parent. MIL piped in and said that he wouldn't have to if dd chose to live with him and my instant reaction was 'over my dead body'. I just couldn't bear to have her live apart from me. Even though our set up is very equal to both parents, I do feel like dd is more 'mine' than DH. My logical brain knows that this is completely unreasonable, which is perhaps why I am thinking about it so much. But it left me wondering; does anyone else feel the same when it comes to their kids? I know it is U to feel this way, my question is more about finding out if I'm the only one who does.

MrsKoala

I think your argument is circular: because you have looked after them you know how to look after them.

None of what you say is intuitive, it's just learning, and practice

i haven't said any different Yarp. I have said exactly that, i said 'It is that because i make the food i know that ds1 will only eat mashed veg and certain meats, no fruit, no dairy etc I can tell by the look on his face whether he is up for trying something new or whether he needs a comforting meal. I can tell when he is about to lob his plate across the room'. Which is exactly that point. I can only do it intuitively now because of the amount of time i have done it. Most parents who spent the same time doing it would be able to. But as only one parent usually does (or even can - you can't have both of you doing 100% of everything) then they are the parent who feels the child belongs more to them.

I don't think DH, regardless of the time he spent doing it, would ever be able to tho, as DH cannot do a lot of those things and finds planning and reading situations hard.

Well if he is special needs it is a bit like my husband not being able to do physical stuff and not because they are men or because they are fathers but because of a problems they have. I could have had the accident my husband had and then I would be the one sitting in the chair and he would be the one doing stuff. So posters saying its because we carry them, give birth to them etc is not the point is it.

Well I felt very little bond with both dc when pregnant or till they were 6 months. So it isn't that with me. It wasn't till I knew them I suppose.

MrsK

I understand what you are saying.

I suppose I am arguing a slightly different point; which is there is no reason, in theory, why a child should not be as bonded to, as close to, or as well-cared-for by their father. I think it's a shame more men don't get the opportunity to do more hands on, or choose not to.

I agree and oddly dh's love is way more unconditional than mine and he felt a bond from the moment I was pregnant. We nearly lost both of them at their births and he was much more traumatised than me. I can't love what I don't understand/know. My dh is all about faith and imagination. I am the meat and potatoes of everyday life kind of person.

Lurker here. Registered to make my first post as this topic is close to my heart.

Honestly, readings the posts so far has been utterly depressing. It seems that the vast majority of posters have the feeling that they the more important parent (while acknowledging that this is unreasonable), and a significant minority say this would mean they'd insist of having the children resident with them should they split.

When my exDW and I had a daughter, I continued to work full time and she was a SAHM. I didn't want it to be that way, but I earned a lot more than her and she was unwell for a year or so after the pregnancy. I was (am) a good dad, and did at least an equal share of household duties even though I worked full time. She did more childcare because she was at home, but I did almost all the housework myself anyway, and when I was home I spent every minute possible with my daughter.

When we split (because she had an affair), the court gave her full custody and I now see my daughter every other weekend. The court said it was because she was the primary carer before the split. I am bitter about it, and feel that I do not have the same opportunity to develop/maintain a relationship with my DD on account of me not seeing her much.

I've remarried now and DW and I are thinking of having children. I'm really anxious about it because I live in utter dread that she'll do the same. My wife is a great women, intelligent and kind, and she says she wouldn't. But this thread is evidence that there can be some pretty strong emotions in play!!!

I have told my wife that if we do have kids, I will insist on being a SAHD, even though it will mean an significant reduction in our household income (I earn more than my current wife, too). I just couldn't bare being told that I won't get equal access because I've (been pressured into) working full time whilst she takes on the role of main carer.

The is of course, a bias against fathers in the courts. The attitudes expressed in this thread are why IMO.

God, I'm so depressed after reading this thread. I miss my daughter. :-(

My ex H doesn't really seem too bothered - he sees DS for a couple of hours on a Wednesday and from 10-5 on a Saturday. One sleepover in a year. Says he is a better father now (he does NO parenting at all).
He did the same to his first wife and eldest DS. Who knows he may do the same to number 3!!

theworried

This is a tiny snapshot of MN, and not everyone agrees with the OP

I feel very sorry for you

I have a friend who is the main earner in her family (her DH works between 5 and 10 hours a week self employed, they have school age children and a part time nanny). She has had advice that if they split up she will be the parent who only sees the DC every other weekend. She has not left for this reason. This is partly because she would miss the DC so much but also (more so) that she thinks that it would not be in the best interests of the children (especially the younger one) to see less of her than they currently do. Based on their particular circumstances I agree. Their relationship is not the reverse of the traditional SAHM situation - when she is at home he does virtually zero with the children (his choice) and sometimes acts like it is an inconvenience that he has to look after them (when the nanny is not there) when she is at work.

I am also the sole earner and my DH is a SAHP. This is a recent thing - we previously both WOH although I have always been the main earner. DC are school age (1 in secondary, 1 in last year of primary). My main concern when he became a SAHP was this very issue. I have got comfortable with it, partly because I cant imagine us splitting up, partly because of the age of the DC (I would expect their wishes to be taken into account and they will soon be old enough to get themselves between 2 houses at will) and partly because we are in a financially secure position that would enable us to live close to each other for their benefit. Also DH would need to have a personality transplant to try to argue to have them with him the bulk of the time because he knows it would not be what they would want (although I do appreciate that people sometimes do seem to have personality transplants when they split up).

The reality is that when couples have DC and one is the sole earner and the other a SAHP, the SAHP is taking on significant financial risk and the WOH parent is taking on risk in relation to their time with the DC in the event of a split.

Theworried I get why you are upset, I don't think that is fair either can you not request more contact, it sounds like they have given you the bare minimum.

Even though I wouldn't like it if I had children with a partner (who I then split from) who felt as strongly as me about having contact with them I think 50/50 parenting is the only fair solution.

This would be a massive commitment from both sides though so the child felt comfortable in both homes, both parents would have to stay local and be able to do school runs etc.

Augusta, I totally agree with your last point, but I would argue the two risks are not equal. I would give up my career and everything I own to have 50/50 custody of my daughter. I spent a fortune on solicitors trying to make it happen. My career and earning potential mean nothing to me in comparison to being a father.

I have my ex the house, car, possessions and all our savings anyway, as I wanted my daughter to have the best and knew that my exW would struggle to provide the same lifestyle we formerly had.

When people get divorced, the courts take into account the lost earnings that the main carer has incurred, and often the assets are split in a way that considers this fairly. This is fair IMO because the main carers (usually mothers) do not always make the choice freely but are influenced by economic or cultural factors. What should also be taken into account though, is that the main earners (more commonly fathers) have often not freely chosen to fore go equal parenting but have done so for the same reasons. 50/50 should be the default even when the previous arrangement has been SAHM and working dad.

I've noticed a lot of people will say that it should all be about what's best for the child, which is fine... but has anyone noticed that what a parent thinks is best for their child in the event of a split is nearly always the same as what's best for them as a parent? I think it's easy to confuse the two once emotions are involved.

Theworried - I wouldn't take the posts on this thread as a representation of women.
As this is a support website, posters who are in agreement with the op has posted in support.
I suspect there is a vast number of readers who disagreed completely, who haven't posted as it isn't what the op requested.

Ex P and I have a very amicable 60/40 arrangement which works out great and both check in on all major issues and school stuff now DD is in P1. She's definitely not mine, or her dad's, we are her's. It helps that we live quite close to each other and I have flexible, if full time, hours. She knows where she's at and I see her every day bar one (and I enjoy my day off enormously!). Ex P really stepped up to the mark when we split so EOW would be a tragedy for him, her, and me.

The arrangement we have also means that we roughly have the same costs and split bigger things 50/50 too, even though I have to keep tally (he was always rubbish at budgets). I know we are lucky it has worked out well but I can honestly say we're better and happier parents now than before we split.

The worried - my op was asking if people have the same, very primal, feelings towards their children. I wasn't suggesting that it was fair or right to have them. Quite the opposite in fact. I am sorry that you are in such an unfair situation.

The worried, I would agree with you that the risks are not equal - but there are far more warnings on here about the dangers (in terms of financial risk) of being the SAHP than the dangers of being the WOHP.

It's interesting reading this thread. For me it's different. I had bad pnd with ds1 and struggled to bond with him, then I went back to work pt and we muddled along. With ds2, I went back to work ft when he was 20 weeks old and dh became a sahd. So ds1 feels more mine than ds2. Ds1 always wants me when he's hurting, or tired, ds2 just wants his dad, always.

If we split up the boys would stay with their dad, it's fairer on them and it's what they are used to. They'd spent two days a week, any two days, with me. Again, because it's the fairer option

And that's what happens. Usually I leave for work as they are waking and get home just before bedtime. So my two days off a week are when we spend the whole day together

Am wondering where equality has gone to, reading this thread.

From day one, my DH and I co-parented; he did feeds and nappies and school drop offs and playmates and parties and supper and now they are teens they all have a refreshingly modern idea of parenting and no stereotyped ideas of who should do what.

I always wanted mine to feel as safe with DH as with me just in case anything happened to me.

I'd be really sad if I thought he believed himself anything other than an equal parent to our children. I would not think that way and I think our children would be aghast if they thought one of us believed ourselves more of their 'owner' than the other.

She's definitely not mine, or her dad's, we are her's

I think that sums up what a child should be. You don't "own them" or have the monopoly on them.

I was talking to my friend about this earlier (who has a 17m old child) and she also said that she irrationally feels that DC will always be more hers. As we were discussing it we realised how insane it is to think like that and we couldn't really justify our feelings but they are still our feelings nonetheless.

In hindsight though I do think it's more about the love and bond that is felt between mother and child as opposed to 'ownership'. It's not my DH's fault that my body was the one designed to carry and birth DS, it's not his fault that I'm the only who can breast feed and it's not his fault I had 10 months off work, but I think the above factors have led to me having a stronger/deeper kind of love and bond than my DH has. This is purely my situation though, I'm not generalising about other families.

Buried

I agree

TheWorried - I completely completely agree with you. So many of these posts are from people still in relationships.. When they breakdown, it's not all nice and civilised and 'we'll do 50/50' - it can be brutal even if the most amicable of cases.

Like you, I worked FT supporting my family (exh & 2dc) so when he left me for OW, I was highly anxious that I wouldn't get fair care. We tried 50/50 and the realisation that I was missing half my children's life was gut wrenching.. I didn't have DC so that they could spent half their time somewhere else, doing god knows what with god knows who But I accepted it because at least I got 50/50...

He pushed for more and more, even withholding the DC as he knew best, they were more 'his' than 'mine' and the thought that I had sacrificed my DCs young childhood to provide only for it to be used against me almost broke me..

Things are stable now - DC actually spend lions share of their time with me now - but I find the tone of this thread pretty horrid..

Your children are not more yours because you spend more time with them etc... They wouldn't exist without the other parent who is just as attached as you..

This has made me just so

Worriedfather I spoke upthread about me and my ex-husband sharing the care of our girls as close to 50/50 as we can, but I also have two older children - I'd been married before.

My first marriage split very acrimoniously. I was the SAHM parent and they stayed with me (partly because he upped and left). Contact was EOW, and none at all for two years. We split when my then youngest was a toddler, and he was three when contact ceased, five when it was re-established. It went from EOW to weekly. Just days. Eventually overnights also. These two kids are adults now. My son is now at uni, but splits his home time between me and his father as he pleases and has a good relationship with us both. Me and his father have even managed to build bridges and are friends ourselves now. A relationship can still be maintained with a low level of contact, but I know it's painful, and I really feel for you.

50:50 custody is usually for the parents - not the child.

All very well saying what you would do but the reality is not like sharing toys.

It's difficult desicions about what is best for your CHILDS life.

And then new partners get involved and it gets increasingly tricky.....