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 think it really depends on the dynamics of the individual set-up and how well the kids are adapting/if they have SEN.

A few years ago I dated a single dad who split 50:50 custody with his ex. But the DC alternated every other night (Monday at dad’s, Tuesday at mum’s etc) between the parents homes which I thought must have been very unsettling.

I didn’t want to meet the DC unless/until we became a serious item but from what my ex said and what mutual friends observed, the poor DC was not coping well.

I think my ex was selfish to carry on with this arrangement and to date me in the circumstances and I pushed to end the relationship.

My ex went on to “accidentally” get his new gf pregnant. She moved in with him, pulling her own DC out of their schools and away from their hometown.

Really hope it works out because of the kids involved but to me this is the adults being very selfish.

50-50 sucks for the children from a stability / being moved from pillar to post perspective - research on this shows that. 50-50 is all about making it fair for the parents.

My stepson now primarily lives with us (at uni) and has said he hated being between two homes when he was younger. All 3 crave staying in one place for more than two seconds. Would they have given up time with Mum or Dad - I don't know? Entirely different question with a different set of pros and cons

Depends on where the parents live. My nieces and nephews do 50/50 and prefer it. Their dad was always the primary cared but they love their mom too.

However they have two equal homes so that changes it. I think if they had a “base” and a home they visited it may be different.

No, I was giving my personal opinion, based on my own life I things I’ve seen.

Just as you do, just as eveyone does.

Which is why I said it was a personal opinion. My other personal opinion is that eating beef is fucking amazing and I love it and personally, think it’s the best thing you can eat. I would expect a vegan to get offended that I’d offered that personal opinion.

I know someone who did exactly that for quite a while. The week she had her son, she lived alone with him, the week he went to his Dad's, she lived with her boyfriend at his house.

It's a bit different for an adult anyway, because a child is not responsible for paying rent, bills, buying food (which obviously will go off if a house is unoccupied for a week) and will most likely be dropped off and picked up if they need to go anywhere.

I don't agree with @Jellycatspyjamas anyway, I don't know much about step-sibling relationships (beyond that East17 song that gets played at Christmas) but I don't think having younger siblings, who happen to be half genetically, is the awful burden it's made out to be on MN, and I know that often step-parents are a positive addition to children's lives. The more adults that love and care about a child the better imo.

I have a handful of separated friends and the DC that seem the most settled and happy are the ones where the Dad has stayed local & have the DC 3 nights every week.
The ones that see their Dad less frequently (eg EOW) seem less happy as they have to pack up stuff to go & don’t want to go in some cases (especially if it is a distance away). They seem more disrupted than the ones that can walk between houses and school & have two permanent homes with all their stuff in.

In reality it isn’t black and white, it isn’t one size fits all. It depends on the parents and the DC.

It depends on the child . Some may like it , some may not . If it’s not solely based on what the child wants then I think 50/50 is about the parents needs .
The admin involved in 50/50 is monumental . Don’t know how parents who divorce can do it .

I would want one stable home if it was me . It can be the dad that is the primary parent too .

My step daughter is with us 50% of the time, she's at her mam's for a full week and with us for a full week. I don't think it's great for her to be honest. I think she'd be better having one house as her home and the other as a house she visits.

It's one where the non resident parent (usually the father) can't win really. Do EoW and a night in the week and you're a Disney dad leaving the bulk of parenting to the mother. Do more and you're just avoiding paying child support.

Divorce is basically a bit shit for children (although sometimes better than the alternatives and absolutely necessary if there's abuse). But shared cared is never going to beat having two loving parents at-home so what can you do?

When my brother and his ex divorced they both moved out of the family home and got new places. The kids did 50/50 living with mum or dad but it was pretty flexible, especially as they got older. They lived in the same village so they could walk between houses if they wanted.
They had a new bedroom at each house and I think it was better because the shared family home was gone.
Both in early 20s now and still see posts on Facebook where they're doing activities with dad (usually football related) or mum (usually music related). Both seem happy and well adjusted but it obviously makes a difference if one parent doesn't actually want to see them 50% of the time.

Your ex is a crap dad so 50/50 would be crap for the kids in your case. I don't think your experience qualifies you to speculate about the impact of 50/50 not being ideal to many children, as you have never done it yourself.

Depending on the parents involved, 50/50 is the default as it is the fairest for all concerned. Obviously as kids get older they can change their minds and this should be accommodated without getting dragged through court, if possible.

I am a child of divorce. Did 50/50 growing up and it was awful. Imo it's more about the needs of the parents than the children.

Surely she will decide that for herself when she is old enough.

The E17 Christmas song is not about step siblings.

You're not even pretending anymore that it's about what's best for the children.

When did the needs of Father's become the most important thing? Why do we have to allow them?

Having been the child in the situation, it's really not that easy to do. You feel like you are hurting your parent.

I would imagine that it depends on a lot of things.

In the very best version, it can be that 50:50 could be a very good thing for kids if it means they spend quality time with each parent. This is something that often doesn't happen when parents are together as one parent may be doing more parenting and the other working. In other words, it can force both parents to be actively involved with the child and the child benefits from that.

However, it can also be very harmful. I've seen families where both parents essentially try and be the 'fun parent', with no one doing the consistent work to e.g. ensure they are taught age appropriate skills or supported with social and emotional development. And where several of the child's needs are simply not met.

I've also seen it lead to a lot of insecurity for children, who feel not quite part of either household with neither the full sense of belonging or responsibility. This also has behavioural consequences.

i would have loved 50/50 but my ex never wanted it. it would have been my ideal but he would rather not see them so i have them 100% of the time

See this is what i meant in my earlier post - I'm seeing a lot of 'the kids hate it' but not actually talking about any lasting damage other than feeling unsettled - whereas it's incredibly easy to find stories on this site from people who had EOW dads growing up and have little actual relationship with them as adults. (Note: that is a huge subject by itself, I'm not claiming it's all down to EOW setups) It's really hard for everyone concerned, noone has a crystal ball, and it's hard when you have a child right now whose not enjoying the setup, but I feel like some people write it off without considering that it does work for some families, and in some cases the short term discomfort is outweighed by them actually being properly parented by both parents long term. It's incredibly difficult though, and for some kids 50/50 won't work at all. But to write it off completely for everyone seems shortsighted.

So much bloody judgement. No one sets out wanting to get divorced and do terrible damage to their children ffs! I also absolutely disagree that 50 50 is somehow selfish. The mother keeping them 100% could also be seen as selfish. Divorced couples often behave badly and use the kids against each other, regardless of the precise custody arrangements, and other divorced couples try to make it work as best it can.

We do 50/50, used to do a 2 or 3 day rotation and we lived very close. Since they've been teens and we live 30 mins from each other, we do one week on, one week off. It isn't ideal for them moving, however it is not all bad, I honestly feel like it helps take the pressure off everyone and makes me for one a better more patient parent as the time with them seems much more precious than if it were 24/7. They get real time with both parents and for us I can't envisage how it would have worked another way. An ironic twist is that ex DH took on more actual parenting than he had ever done, cooking tea etc- It was like he fully took on co parenting for the first time. I'd obviously enabled that also. If he'd done as much as he later went on to do after the divorce we would probably never have split up. Sad that it takes that to realise it.

I'm completely estranged from one of my parents now so I would call that lasting damage tbh.

Since the fathers for justice movement unfortunately

You see it all the time with men demanding to have their young, breastfed babies overnight with 0 regard for how that would NOT be in the best interest of the baby.

Yup. And for some reason the courts these days support them.

I did say in my other post that there are obviously outliers in every circumstances - I'm sorry this happened to you.