To say 50/50 isn't ideal for many children?

[cadburyegg]

50/50 seems to be thought of as the best way to share children after a split but AIBU to think that this isn't always best for the children involved?

My children are with me approx 80% of the time and they love being "at home". They don't talk about their dads being another home, even though I do. I know they would hate having to move around every week and never having one base, they find it hard enough EOW.

So AIBU? Or if you have 50/50 are the kids happy with it?

I doubt it. Half of the reason I hated it was I hated moving between houses which had nothing to do with my Dad being crap.

First off, you can't use anecdotes off Mumsnet as the basis for statistical analysis. We would only know how the majority of adults who were 50/50 as children felt about that if we had several peer-reviewed studies to tell us, and preferably a meta-analysis. I don't have any of these to hand, and am not inclined to look right now.

The issue as to whether it is "best" for the children is the same. The studies do indicate that, based on outcomes, children raised 50/50 are better off as adults than children raised with 80/20 or other less equal splits.

The result that we'd get from the first question doesn't impact the answer we have for the second.

The studies do indicate that, based on outcomes, children raised 50/50 are better off as adults than children raised with 80/20 or other less equal splits.

Again, most likely because it’s a different sample - so it’s those differences in the sample that are driving differences in outcomes. It’s not a like for like comparison.

Also 20 years or so ago wasn't 50/50 highly unusual? It certainly was when we had to do it as kids.

A decent study controls for other variables. I believe a lot of them come from Scandinavian countries where 50/50 has been more common for a while.

A decent study controls for other variables

Yes, as I said in my previous post, they of course try to do this, but it is always inevitably very , very imperfect.
The reality of these kinds of methodologies are that they are extremely rudimentary and approximate in what they can control for in the model. If there are differences in your sample, this will effect outcomes. You really can't judge outcomes of different arrangements like this without matched controls or other QED methods. ( I'm a social research scientist).

😥. So far we have a lot of parents on this thread saying that 50-50 is a good idea and not one person who had experience of this a child saying it was anything other than awful.

Yes I've noticed this as well.

It's similar to when there are discussions around blended families. The parents and step parents say it mostly works well, but the posters who grew up with step siblings etc say that they hated it for the most part.

I do concede that:

• 50:50 may work out with 2 equally involved (financially and emotionally) parents, however hard it is for me to relate to that
• 50:50 may not have been common in my generation when we were children, so there is less experience to draw from

We have a 50 50 arrangement, it did work well until my ex decided to move over an hour away and into the house of his new partner and their children. That has caused issues and my DC would prefer to spend school weeks with me, but my ex will not countenance it because he wants his time - which I understand, but don't make choices that actively negatively impact our children?

Honestly, I think human beings have the capacity to be happy or unhappy in a variety of different situations and unhappy people tend to speak up more. The split between parents is only part of a much bigger picture about how children cope with their parents divorce.

There are so many variables and children are individuals with different preferences.

As a step mother and former step child I have never understood why parents think living far apart from each other is a good idea. It just causes issues and makes everyone's life harder.

The point is that whether they like it, and whether it's best for them, are not necessarily related.

Some the 50/50 splits seem overly complex. What's wrong with 7 at dads and 7 and mums.
Shuffling around 4/3 rotation etc sounds like a pita...

I do think when other partners are brought in to the mix makes it more difficult.

Ok well what would you have preferred if you could have chosen?

There was a PP from a Scandinavian country who said it was the common way to parent after separation. 50:50 or roughly that.

Scandinavian countries are generally seen as the best run places where the happiest people live. I don’t think broken Britain is the happiest place with the happiest people. Perhaps it’s time to take a note from their book.

I would have preferred to live with my mum full time and seen my Dad perhaps EOW and maybe the odd weekday evening.

That’s fair enough saying you’d prefer that but that doesn’t seem like much time with your dad. That’s your thoughts and I respect what you’re saying but I don’t think generally that would be in the best interest of most children (with good dads) as it wouldn’t be enough time to create a strong bond/attachment that’s the concern.

DB and I went to our parents 50/50 after they divorced. They lived close enough (20/30 mins drive) to make it work well. Was made easier when I passed my driving test as could take DB and I between the two but it worked for us. I would have hated only seeing one parent every weekend / other weekend.

I could have seen him more often than that, I just wouldn't have wanted to stay overnight. As an adult I still don't like being away from home.

Seems like you’re asking two separate questions here. 50/50 can work quite well, as it does in my family. That said, my mother had “full custody” following my folks’ split, and that worked well too. Depends on the parents involved, in my experience (from both sides). I’d hasten to add though, not all 50/50s are created equal, however counterintuitive that may sound. The kids could have a continuous six months with one parent, and the other six months of the year with the other, for example. That’s quite different from the arrangement we have, wherein neither parent nor the children go longer than three days/nights without “access”. And not to toot our collective trumpet, but we’ve had nothing but (honestly unexpected) praise as a result. The proof is in the pudding I guess. There’s no love lost between the ex and I, but the kids are happy, healthy and thriving. Long may it continue!

I find 4/3 easier as it allows each day of the week to have a set routine. Also for young kids I feel seven days is a long time to go without seeing either parent

Maybe it suggests that better outcomes for children and 50:50 arrangements are both the result of a common cause?

Where you have parents who are more generally reasonable and interested in their children then you are more likely to have better outcomes for the children for that reason, and you're also more likely to have a 50:50 arrangement because neither parent wants to step away and both are willing to compromise.

Agreed. We do three nights together, one night with the other parent, then another three nights together, then it switches to the other parent in the same pattern. Works great for us all round.

it’s exactly this.
Also I think there will be a relationship between 50/50 and other demographic factors- wealth will be one I’m sure.

Right, yes. Both my parents were able to afford houses with a room for each child. Though this was in the mid-90s, so that was easier then.

But obviously a less well off family will be one where, after the split, one of the parents is likely not to be able to afford to house the children for half the time. A Dad is not going to be given 50:50 custody of their only renting a room somewhere.