To ask if most people think a child's 'main' home should be with Mum? (Co-parenting)

[CarrieMatthison]

This is my brothers situation not mine, but just wanted to ask for opinions.

My brother has a son who has just turned 4. He was never with his sons mum, it was a short relationship that ended before DN was born but they've co-parented the last 4 years and DN is a happy little boy with a great relationship with both parents.

Since DN was around 18 months they have done a fairly 50/50 split but I'd say in terms of 'responsibilities' my DB does more - he sorts most of his appointments, takes him to clubs and is generally very hands on and engaged. I can't speak for what his ex does as I really don't know her, but DB thinks he is the more 'primary' parent at this point. I suspect she would disagree.

Anyway, the issue is that they need to start looking at primary schools for next September and they can't agree on where his 'main' residence should be and therefore what schools to apply for. They both want it to be their address, local schools to them but they both live in different towns so drop offs and pick ups and therefore continuing 50/50 will be difficult for the parent who ends up not being the resident one. They both very much want to do it though. It'd not financially or logistically possible for either to move.

It's tricky because deep down and as a mother to my own kids I would never in a million years want their main home to be somewhere other than with me! As fabulous as my DH (and DB) is, I'm their mum and it would break me. But DB is adamant that this is just reverse sexism and if they went through court to decide she would 'win' just because she's a woman.

Would love to know what other mums think?

I'm really glad I posted on here. I know deep down my DB wants whatever is best for DN even if it costs him so contact time. I think he is just down in the dumps at the moment because he never for a moment imagined he would be a part time parent when he had kids. He's always wanted to do better than our dad did.

Moving isn't entirely out of the question, he owns his own (small) house with a mortgage and prices are like for like in his exs town. I think if he could just pick his house up and move it he would but having to pay stamp duty, solicitors expenses, EA fees etc will have to come out of his equity which will hurt his finances. He does okay but as he's a single person things are tight as it is. It would be the same for her though I imagine. Such a nightmare!!

It's really not "such a nightmare". Kid will be at school soon, everything will be easier. Childcare bill will drop, he can work full time again. If he's managing now, he'll more than be able to manage next year - put the spare towards moving. It's really the obvious thing to do if being present is the priority.

Focus on what school he should go to. Then work backwards from that as it will dictate what primary residence it will be put down on the form.

@Boomer55 Who judges “better”? The parent who makes the lists detailing their superiority or the mum with the hands on day to day care that goes unnoticed but is vital? It’s very subjective and it’s not about who is best. It’s about what DS needs from both of them and his needs are paramount. Not the parent detailing their skills and superior involvement.

I would have been heartbroken as a child not to have lived with my mum growing up.
I was lucky enough to have both parents at home but there was no comparison between mum and dad. I needed a mum. It was nice to also have a dad but if he’d have insisted I lived with him 50/50 Id have hated him for it.

I got put off from you saying that he was never in a relationship with her and then continued to say they broke up before child was born after a short relationship… so they was together. You’re trying to put down the mother but she has been very fair by allowing 50/50 to such a small child. I would never think 50/50 is suitable for children, let alone small children as kids deserve stability and constant communication and contact with the parent they don’t live with.

Whoever the child goes to school near means that the child will end up spending more time with that parent - that is why the mum will not agree and I wouldn’t either. Why should a parent want to give up that contact. I think a lot of people don’t understand the mother bond in comparison to the father bond - people talk about father rights but the mother literally grew the child for months, nursed that baby - it’s a completely different bond than what a father has, sorry

Honestly if they live 30 miutes apart I would find the school in the middle and continue as they have been. 15 minutes in the car to school isn't a problem or out if the ordinary.
Mediation can help in terms of having a safe place to chat it through, and listen to ideas one hadn't considered.

Hahaha. Yes. I thought the same on men often over estimating their contribution!

Not automatically no, they should go to the better parent

I never understand these statements that as a mum somehow you'd be more "broken" than your husband as their dad if you did break up. Traditionally most children live with their mum post break up, but they don't "belong" to you more just because you're their mum.

I wouldn't go that far, but knowing plenty of kids who do the 50/50 thing in IRL, I do think they need a single home.

I really think the best thing parents can do if they separate is live near to each other. This means their children can live near friends and hobbies and school. It also means there's no stress if they leave something at the wrong house.

@NcforthiscmsThat suggestion has a huge number of pitfalls. School admissions requires ONE address. That of the resident parent. My LA says that’s the parent whose address is used for GP and the parent who receives the child benefit. The child almost certainly won’t be in catchment for a school 15 minutes from both parents. The child might not get into any school in this scenario. Plus what about friends who are local? What about the possibility of walking to school? It’s really not sensible to try this. The parents must decide who is to be the resident parent and use that address for at least the local catchment school. Again, this is about the best interests of DS, not warring parents who have to stake a claim for 50/50. 50/50 distance is all about them!

I know someone who did that....and they continue to co-parent.
Where we live a 15 miute drive is well within catchment but I understand maybe not for big cities.
Depending on the la policy depends which parent address you put. Mediation will help in the decision if its a truly 50-50 situation....and if it's worth continuing that for the child.

Definitely agree. My NDN has 2-2-3 arrangement for the three older DC. I always feel sorry for them. They're living out a back pack. See them going back and forth. Really sad. They must feel like they don't belong.

The three DC are at an out of catchment school next door to me (certainly the two primary aged ones) so I am assuming it's the Dad that lives in the catchment zone for the school instead.

Can't be an easy decision especially for the family next to me where there's actually a good primary a two minute walk from their front door...must be a reason why they don't attend the local one that is in the mum's residential address.

Have you asked them? Or are you just imagining what they think?

Yes I am seeing it play out with the 13yo, 11yo and 9yo next door to me. The youngest who lives permanently next door is 4yo and belongs to the mum's latest partner.....sad seeing then traipsing their backpack back and forth every few days. I do wonder who it's really benefitting because I can't imagine it's much fun and they probably feel they don't belong anywhere. How do these situations get agreed? 2-2-3? Who decides?

They don't exactly look thrilled! I wouldn't either in their shoes.

Would it work for one parent to have them during the week and the other at weekends? It would probably work out roughly equal time at each once you take time at school into account? Or a school halfway could work.

So you're just imagining it.

I agree. It's the parents who should be moving each time with their back pack and not the children!

They look miserable. Says it all. Getting pulled this way and that.

At least they get two Christmases🤷‍♀️

Well said👏

Sure. On the occasions you see them, they look miserable. And you have invented that the reason they look miserable is because of their living arrangements and not the infinity of other reasons why a child may look unhappy at a given moment.