To think 50/50 childcare split sounds terrible

[887PooleFan]

A friend is splitting from her husband, they have a 3 year old. Acrimonious split unfortunately. Through his solicitor (they no longer speak to each other at all) he has suggested they go for 50/50 split of care for their DD in a 2-2-3 model. A few of us were having lunch and this friend asked us what we thought (she really doesn't like it and was looking for opinions). I said I'm not sure, it sounds especially difficult for an older child (homework, sport kits, etc, don't most kids need routine?) and she should check with her solicitor if that's something the court would give. I thought it was a batshit proposal but I didn't want to add fuel to the fire and be too harsh in giving my opinion, and wanted to have a think really. From a quick Google, it seems like a common arrangement, does it actually work well in practice? I just can't imagine it being in the best interest of a child to bounce from house to house so much.

Much less than having an actual attachment disorder which I suspect is the case with her.

I think 50/50 is fair , the children should have a relationship with both parents but 2-2-3 is bonkers. We did 3-4 with my parents (ie 3 days one week, 4 days the next, so 7 days out of 14 with each parent) and it worked fine.

I think it can work and have known it to but it requires parents to get on well and communicate. Same with any split really other than the standard every other weekend which I think lends itself more to one parent being more in charge.

This is an only child, who is only 3 though. No sibling support, and unlikely to understand the arrangement, or even remember what day it is.

The biggest hurdle is the child’s clothes, mostly the males asking woman to return X coat or Y shoes and getting the child to cart these back and forth. Or 1 parent buying expensive clothes and the other from a supermarket -

I would want to know who is responsible for daycare costs, and on which days, if he couldn’t take the child there needs to be reasonable notice, or he finds an alternative care -

Honestly most men won’t put up with this back and to crap -

Definitely not what’s best for the child. 1 week on 1 week off better.

Did you ever do this as a child? Honestly if you’ve never done it as a child I’m shocked that you’re suggesting it was harder on you.

I have 2 friends who did 2 2 3 when they split up. It worked very well. Ones youngest was 3 when they split. The other was 4 when her parents split.

It worked incredibly well & none of the kids have suffered

I think 2/2/3 could be a good solution.

Maybe I'm being dim but surely 2-2-3 isn't 50/50 unless you're swapping the 3?

Friends of mine have small children and split when little was 18m. She collects them Sunday night and then has them til teatime Wednesday. He has them Wednesday night till Saturday morning. They alternate Saturday night so it's either 3 or 4 days with each.
It seems to work well actually as they always deal with the same after school clubs etc.

Then you support that with visual aids such as a calendar. And by each parent being a parent and saying things like "today I'm dropping you off at nursery and daddy will collect you and you'll have so much fun and I will see you soon"

3 year olds who go to nursery some days and have time with parent or grandparents might not know it's Tuesday but will know it's a granny day etc. They are capable of change and adaptation when properly supported by loving adults.

A week is far too long for a 3 year old to be without either parent and a midweek visit would be totally confusing for the poor kid.

But the child is entitled to loving relationships with both parents and no system is perfect.

Pretty much everyone who says it’s a bad idea will be assuming the dad should therefore have less time. It’s never the mum…

Yes it’s awful but who is going to give up their time with their child to be the EOW parent? Is that just as awful in a different way?

Yes you swap the 3 the 3 is Fri-sat-sun
so it’s.
mon and Tues with parent A
weds and Thurs with parent B
Fri-sun with alternate parents

He's a brilliant dad and he deserves as much time with them as I do

it’s not about what either of you deserve though .
this is the problem is that culturally/ legally we have started to see things in these terms- what do men “deserve”, what are men entitled to.
it should be about the kids best interests. Nothing more, nothing less.

This would be my dream (think I’m the only woman that would love this!) sounds like the ideal to me.

Do children not deserve to have a good relationship with both parents? Do children not deserve to see both men and women being equally involved in childcare?

But the children deserve equal time with a loving and safe parent don't they?

As said already, no one forsees having to make these decisions when starting a family but for lots it has to be done.
I hope no one feels guilty reading all of these “this is batshit” responses because that’s a reality for many families and it can work well. I’m sure some are quick to judge on it without being in the position of not being able to tuck their children in every night.
Routines develop and organisation improves. Knowing it’s a mummy/daddy day, etc.
Problems can arise with clothes if one household isn’t on top of laundry or doesn’t have enough uniform. Nice new clothes can disappear to the other household and be returned when they have outgrown it. Children can arrive wearing dirty clothes of clothes completely inappropriate with the weather. Interesting how some fathers don’t seem to keep on top of clothing, replacing them when they outgrow them, etc.

It really depends. I’m not sure making things exactly equal / “fair” for the adults is usually a priority from a child’s point of view. Certainly not always.

I’m not saying that 50/50 isn’t sometimes in a child’s best interests- in some cases it may very well be. But the point is that people tend to see it from what is “fair” for the parents (eg your comments about your ex “deserving” what you get)- which is not at all what child care arrangements should be about in any way shape or form.

My step-children have always had 50:50 and tried

7:7 - far too long for everyone, kids and parents alike if it’s not a one off like a holiday. Weirdly it suited the toddler most but he was easy going at that age. The idea of 7:7 with opposite parent having the toddler for the day on Wednesday and older kids after school that evening too was mooted but flatly rejected by DPs ex.

3:3:2 was then what was done for several years. I wouldn’t say it worked especially well but it was the ex’s tactic to try and make my DP fail because it massively fucked up his work schedule due to school runs and them changing each week made days in the office etc. hard to arrange and inconsistent. He didn’t give up because he loves his kids more than anything, but it was confusing for everyone (kids, parents, grandparents etc. couldn’t figure out when we had the kids).

2:2:5:5 (Monday-Tuesday at dad’s, wed-thurs at mom’s then alternating weekends). This works the best by far and I can’t see it changing, it means both parents have set work schedules (mom works shifts but dad works flexible 9-5 and has office days on wed-thurs) and thus have all their time for the kids when they do see them. It means they always know what house they’re going to after school except on Fridays, but then they do know as they will be told (or as they’re older now anyway simply know as they know where they were before).

We do a 2-2-3 which is actually a 2-2-3. Week 1 Mon and Tues with Parent A, Wed and Thurs with Parent B, Fri, Sat, Sun with Parent A - then in reverse, so Week 2 Mon and Tues with Parent B, Wed and Thurs with Parent A, Fri, Sat, Sun with Parent B. Then start all over again

Each parent gets a weekend. Child isn’t away from either parent for longer than 2 or 3 days. Each parent has a chance to have a Bank Hol Monday, take child to swimming on Wed or whatever.

I don't disagree with you. Perhaps I worded it badly. The bit I struggle with is the dogma that child must give up time with a dad because of the child's needs or the mums wishes.

Of course there are children for whom it is far better for their wellbeing to have one consistent home (and less with an inconsistent care giver). Of course there are men who quite happily have less than 50/50 and live their best lives. .

But where there are two safe loving consistent parents I don't believe that if the child needs greater time at one home it should default to the mother as so many people seem to feel.

Believe me I would kill for my kids every night. I stayed too long in a soul destroying marriage because I wanted to put them to bed every night.

But I also firmly believe with the experience of my children that a properly managed and parented 50/50 can offer them stability and consistency.

Exactly as the other poster said-damned if they do damned if they dont! And if its 50/50 then they are doing just as much parenting as the other.

So who decides which parent is in the kids best interest? You seem to be implying mum