Mums v Dads

[Mitzicoco]

Genuine question. Why is it that most children end up living with their mums when parents seperate?

Lots of stuff on here about kids needing "the primary carer". It's as if kids are incapable of loving two parents at once!

Reading comprehension not your strong point, buddy?

I'm not sure courts do favour women, from my experience it is more about the presumption in favour of status quo. So if a man walks away and sees the children infrequently or frequently but not as often as he would like then later goes to court for more the court are unlikely to change it unless it can be proved it's in the best interest of the child (paramountcy/welfare principle). It seems most people assume this is the court favouring mum but usually it is the court favouring things being stable and predictable for children as unless the current arrangement cause harm children generally like stability and predictability.

Also, I don't think a large proportion of child arrangement orders are passed considering the vast amounts of separated parents. Most are private arrangements and therefore it is whether the parents want 50/50 or not and who they think should have the more if not.

Lots of kids are okay with 50/50 but some are not and that has to be considered. It is the right of the child to have contact with both their parents, this really isn't about the right of parents at all

Lots of stuff on here about kids needing "the primary carer". It's as if kids are incapable of loving two parents at once!

That’s not what I’m saying at all. My little boy adores his Dad. My husband is a wonderful father and very hands on. That’s a fact.
It’s also a fact that my little boy notices my absence more than his dad’s. Not a reflection of his love for his dad, or my husbands skills as a parent, just a reality. (Age is a big factor here to. My little boy is only 2. His dependence on me will naturally reduce as he gets older)

I will be completely honest though, I HATE the idea of 50/50 (unless it is the parents who swap houses and the children stay in the same place). I know as an adult I really wouldn’t want to have to live between 2 homes, I don’t think we should do it to children. I can’t imagine this ever being in the best interest of my child. As heartbroken as I’d be, I’d rather he live with his dad, and me see him every other weekend than put him through that.

"Something is wromg though, that it isn't 50/50. I know that is a massive generalisation but in an ideal world (which wouldn't have parents slpitting up in the first place!) shouldn't both parents have equal custody?"
Yes.

Something is wromg though, that it isn't 50/50. I know that is a massive generalisation but in an ideal world (which wouldn't have parents slpitting up in the first place!) shouldn't both parents have equal custody?

But would you want to live between 2 homes * ? Because that’s the reality for the majority of children where custody is split 50/50. (As I’ve already said, I would be very much in favour or 50/50 if it was the parents who swapped homes).
Would you want to have half your possessions away from you, half of the time? Or have to pack up those possessions every 3 days/every week, whatever the arrangement is? How can that be in the best interests of the child?

It isn't.

But parents in such an arrangement will tell themselves it is, because it's easier for them.

If it was so great, they'd be the one up and moving house every few days.

There are studies showing 50/50 in primary aged children can be damaging they need a main carer

Personally I think walking away is far to easy dump your kid pay 14% of your wages never be bothered again

OooErMissus puts it succinctly and perfectly.

It's really intersting reading all this. I can't shake the feeling off though, that a lot of men get screwed by the system.

There's a lot of men who don't want 50% of care and don't pay ANY maintenance as they think that the children with new wife take precedence and that mum's new partner should pay for his kids instead.

There are children who are screwed by the courts when they get their decision wrong but for every Dad who is unfairly denied, there are Dads who shouldn't be allowed contact imo. If you read MN you'd know this.

It's really intersting reading all this. I can't shake the feeling off though, that a lot of men get screwed by the system.

You should educate yourself on the ways that mums see screwed by the system. It's too easy for Dads to avoid paying maintenance and have contact but charge mum for childcare on the day of contact. Also read on how self employed men can cheat the system legitimately and easily. There are men owing 5 figure sums to their exes and children!

Speaking as someone who lost her mother at a young age, I would have given anything to have the chance to see both my parents- even if that meant swapping houses every week. As it was, I was sent to boarding school. I know which I would have preferred.

Sorry to be so blunt but I would have thought you'd be more sympathetic about how it's not possible to have 50% custody in some jobs then.

I went to boarding school too but it was because my father's work was all over the world and he couldn't guarantee being in one place long enough for my sister and I to take O levels or A levels.

I am being defensive as I don't have 50/50 with my ex. He travels overseas sometimes and gets back from work at 8pm so it's not possible for him to have 50/50. He never works weekends but can not go part-time or work from home either. Neither I nor the courts are shafting him.

Yes, I totally agree that it isn't always possible, just thought maybe it should be the starting point.

I don't know, but it just seems like we are all stuck in a 1950's timewarp!

because so many women want it all: father at work all week, when they have the children, then father takes the kids at the weekend, and mothers have every weekend off. Cushy life, mothers do not want to lose out.

Thankfully, things seem to improve, more and more fathers get custody!

Oh dear

Mitzicoco I’m so sorry, that truly is tragic.

But it is an extreme.

It’s natural that you would have done anything to get back the parent you lost. But that doesn’t mean that it’s best for children who have 2 surviving parents to be constantly shuttled between them.

We often had very little food growing up. My school lunch was frequently the only meal I got, regularly we were only able to have toast for dinner. On those nights I would have given anything for just a bowl of hot soup. I wouldn’t want another child to have to settle for this just because I would have been beyond grateful for it.

When my husband and I seperated it never occurred to him for one second to have the kids.
In 10 years he hasnt even had them overnight. Once, after a row, he did threaten to sue for joint custody. Until I told him he was a moron because he already had it and if he wanted to have the children live with him half the time to just go right ahead
Never heard another peep about it
Some husbands want joint custody. Others not so much

I think the child should be with the most stable parent but I suppose it’s hard to judge that. My brothers ex has been a terrible role model to her children and they would have been better with him.

Of the 3 divorces that I know have finalised in the last year, each one started with the dad asking for 50% childcare.

None of the dads now see their DC with any regularity.

1. Moved to a different continent, comes back for the odd weekend here and there, but doesn't necessarily see his DC when he's in the UK

1. Works away a lot, doesn't always see his DC when he's home, or turns up randomly at short notice and makes his ex/DC feel bad that they already have plans and aren't available to see him.

1. Has moved in with the OW and her DC. Refuses to have the DC overnight, takes them out to the cinema/ for a McDonalds every now and then.

2 don't pay maintenance, 1 pays a reduced amount as he now has other DC to support.

Obviously this is a very small sample group, but in each instance the mother worked, wanted to work more to support herself & her DC & wanted a 50/50 childcare split or similar.

In each instance the Dad simply walked away from his DC as if they were no longer his concern.

This is what we need to stop. It takes 2 people to bring a child into this world, so 2 people should support that child through life.

Preferably that support will be emotional, physical & financial, but at the minimum financial support should be forced by law if not willingly given.

From what I've read it seems that dad's have not so much to do with their dcs. Why though?

Because a lot of raising kids is hard drudgery.

Not all of it, by any means - there's pure joy, and it's very rewarding.

But a lot of the day-to-day - especially in the early years (which is where a lot of relationships falter) - is grinding and relentless.

So if you can opt out - because someone else is forced to opt in - many do.

And in the main (by no means all), that's men. 🤷🏻‍♀️

And I speak very much as someone whose experience is pretty much exclusively of good, decent, present, caring, involved, kind, loving, engaged men (fathers). ❤️

Doesn't stop me noticing how shit (far too) many are, and how quick they are to opt out, given a whisker of a chance.