To say 50/50 shared custody is selfish and horrible for children

[5050hell]

I spent my childhood doing 2/2/3. I have begged my partner should we end up divorcing that we never do this to our children. We are actually very happy together, this is only a worry of mine due to how much I hated it as a child.

Never spending more than 5 consecutive nights anywhere. Constantly packing a bag and having to drag it to school (as that was when switches happened, leave one house and go back to another). As I got older never having the clothes I wanted, or even the book I was planning on reading next. Trying to make plans with friends, then turning up at the other parents house only to be told that my Saturday was spoken for. Parents being difficult about sleepovers at friends as would be missing 'their' night. No flexibility, parents acting hurt if I didn't want to stick to the schedule. Not to mention my dad did not pay maintenance due to this arrangement, and certain things were supposed to be done turn by turn (ie. Dinner money, bus pass school trips) often spent so long arguing I never got them!

It's mainly my father I resent, as this set up was arranged for him to avoid maintenance payments. I do resent my mother for not trying harder to fight it. We've spoken about it since, she says she thought it was the right thing.

I am extremely adverse to staying anywhere other than my own home as an adult, and feel like I always need a routine and schedule and worry about planning etc.

I haven't thought about this for many years until the stage of life now becoming a parent myself.

Perhaps I was an overly sensitive kid? Maybe it's easier now with phones etc.

I can't help but think that for a child it's far better to have a main home, and visits to the other parent. AIBU?

YANBU OP. I am surprised how many people respond to a OP that says "horrible for the child" by saying, would you want to be the parent who sees them less. So not the point.

When I was growing up it was more usual to have an EOW arrangement, and I had something like that, although my dad was a merchant sailor so it was more complicated. We are close now, though.

The kids I knew who had 50/50 didn't like it though, they hated it and gave it up as soon as they were teens. I have nieces and cousins more recently who are the same - back and forth as kids, as soon as they were old enough to not just accept it they picked one home to stay in as a main base.

The closest arrangement I ever saw that seemed to work had the parents living one street away from each other, and the kids stayed for 6 months with each. But saw the other parent lots during that time. Even they all stopped doing it by 14.

In response to the final part of your quote I think it's because we're discussing living arrangements rather than time spent with either parent.

We can only draw conclusions from our own experiences but I mentioned further upthread I only did one night a week at my Dad's. In theory he could've asked my Mum to see us more - take us out on the weekend, offer to have us round for dinner midweek etc. He didn't. On my one night a week with him he spent it in the local pub and I entertained myself. I resent that now as an adult and our relationship probably would've suffered even more if he'd had me for 50% of the week.

It's really difficult to manage because I feel like if I'd been asked how I felt about the contact arrangements as a kid I'm not sure I'd have been able to answer honestly - because they were what they were. I see Dad one night a week and he doesn't spend time with me, I guess that's okay? It's only as an adult I can see how crap that is.

It's clearly a complex issue - I'm still in camp children need one base to call home but that doesn't necessarily mean one parent then has to be absent 90% of the time just because they don't live with them.

No - my parents split in the mid 70s (I was about 5) when overnighting (and the maths that goes with it) wasn't a thing. I've no idea what the financial arrangement was, but Mum stayed in the marital home with me and my brother and Dad bought a house in the next village.

I don't think being willing to pick up forgotten items cuts it, tbh. It doesn't change the basic fact of rootlessness.

If parents are really committed, I think they should be able to make one home base work while still remaining committed to being present.

Tbh, I think a lot of divorced parents with 50/50 like their time off and see it as what they deserve if the other parents isn't tied down all the time either. Which is fair enough in a way, but it sure as fuck isn't about the kids.

Hate it when people imply others give up on marriages 'too easily'.
If someone doesn't want to consent to an intimate relationship (and i dont just mean sexually) then they dont have to. That's it. Discussion over. The judgement other people give on how hard you have or haven't tried, or whether your reason is 'enough' is honestly, pretty horrendous. We cannot expect people to carry on intimate relationships (and possibly deceive their partners on their true feelings which is damaging to the partner) for the sake of 'keeping families together'. Its wrong. Noone knows what goes behind closed doors and anyone who believes that anyone in an otherwise happy functioning relationship wakes up one day and decides to torpedo their life on a whim are just being wilfully naive to how people can drown in death by 1000 cuts.

I mean, this whole thread is based on the idea that parents should never put their own needs before their kids needs. It’s not controversial to point out the best thing for their kids is to have all the family in one home - any custody arrangement beyond that is bound to negatively affect the kids in one way or another.

Hate it when people imply others give up on marriages 'too easily'.
If someone doesn't want to consent to an intimate relationship (and i dont just mean sexually) then they dont have to. That's it. Discussion over

I agree with this but also extend it to the children which means I would never move a new partner into my child's home.

I don’t understand why anyone is carrying their items around in a hold all.

We were 50/50 for a long time with my stepsons mum. He had two of everything.

Two fully set up bedrooms of his own, two wardrobes full of clothes, two iPads, two lots of toys he liked, two drawers full of school uniform.

If he went to her house in something, she’d put him back in it on the next transition to us day, and the same in reverse.

Why would he have needed to carry clothes round, he had clothes in both houses?

He’s FT with us now, but that set up worked well for years and was a routine he was used to. If anything he just had double everything and two parents who gave him two homes.

I was an EOW kid, and if anything I’d say that makes you feel like a guest in your parent’s and their new family’s home.

That should be irrelevant.

What is more important, happiness for the adults or stable childhood for the child?

Parents should make sacrifices for their children. How many times do I hear parents say “I’d die for my kids” and yet they won’t sacrifice their own wants and convenience. Actions speak louder than words.

double posted

‘It’s not controversial to point out the best thing for their kids is to have all the family in one home - any custody arrangement beyond that is bound to negatively affect the kids in one way or another’

but this just isn’t true @EmeraldSloth Remember we’re not comparing happy families here. A happy family all together isn’t one of the available options in the subject we’re discussing.

the starting point is that the mum and dad don’t get on at all any more, and don’t want to be together or sleep together.

it’s from that root that you are then comparing the options.

and there are many many now adults, who grew up with 2 parents hating each other in the same house, who would say they would never put their kids through that.

Tbh, I think a lot of divorced parents with 50/50 like their time off and see it as what they deserve if the other parents isn't tied down all the time either. Which is fair enough in a way, but it sure as fuck isn't about the kids.

This is so true. I often used to think that parents would fight to have as much time as possible with their children, but often the reverse is true. I've read tales on MN, about parents being hellbent on preserving every minute of child-free time, some of them are quite savage about it !!!!

Except there aren't just two options - parents love each other or parents hate each other. It's also possible to 'fall out of love' with your partner but still work on making your marriage a functional partnership, making your home a safe place for your children etc.

It takes two, so if one parent is vicious/dysfunctional then divorce is probably the least bad option. But if you're dealing with two halfway decent adults then actually continuing to live together for the kids might just be the better option, no matter how controversial that statement has become.

I'm separated a while. We were two individuals who brought our own issues into the marriage, made a mess of it. I did the work. He didn't. I could no longer be married to him, it made me very ill, I was so stressed. He would like to stay married at all costs, I simply can't. We brought two wonderful DC into the world.

Now we co-parent from the family home with another home nearby (about 200m away) which we rotate to. Sometimes we are in the one house, we have different rooms. We rub along fine, I guess we are kind of friends, we can do family dinners together.

We are lucky that we don't have money issues, that helps a lot. I had thought of having separate homes but I think a) it's better for the kids this way while they are young (4&11) b) exDH is simply chaotic when it comes to practicalities and this would stress me more and c) neither of us want to spend less time with the kids. They are the priority.

I also have zero interest in a serious partner anytime soon nor have I any desire to live with another man. I wouldn't mind dating I guess but it would be on my terms.

This works right now for us. I suppose it could all change but for now I think both parents and children are doing better with the arrangement.

I honestly hope some of the self righteous posters on here never find themselves <clutches pearls> divorcing!

As a pp said, nobody who thinks they have any option would willingly chuck the grenade into their life that is divorce without very good reason. Its not like people do it for shits and giggles.

If you're not divorced, congratulations. Its largely luck. Don't think it's because you're somehow just better.

What a ridiculous OP. You had an awful dad and you resent that half of your childhood was spent with him. But what if you loved being with both parents equally and it would be horrible being apart from either one for long? The best solution is different for everyone.

It might be @Thatsalineallright, but I bet you will find now adults who were once children in that situation who will say they knew and it left them with not a clue about what a good relationship looks like.

My point is simply this. It is silly to make a sweeping statement that 50/50 is selfish and horrible. There are pros and cons to every single option available to a couple who have fallen out of love. One can only hope that most couples will handle the logistics keeping what is best for their children in mind.

That's not true though, is it?

Just go and take a look at literally any post on here about relationship problems. The comments are overrun with people telling OPs to serve divorce papers, before even attempting to communicate with their DH about the issue.

‘If you're not divorced, congratulations. It’s largely luck. Don't think it's because you're somehow just better’

ironically I think the couples who did make great decisions when choosing who to create a family with, have very possibly their parents to thank for giving them the tools to choose wisely, whether that was through role modelling or through divorcing themselves and role modelling what isn’t acceptable.

many people who made bad choices did so because they were role modelled rubbish marriages with parents who were possible better off splitting up.

YANBU. I was very happy with my mum's house as home and then staying at my dad's EOW. I think a sense of a solid home is much more important than both parents getting 50%, which seems to be more for their benefit than the child's. As has been said, I very much doubt many of the posters who are saying that children are happy doing 2/2/3 etc would be willing to do it themselves (and the children have no real choice!).

I feel the opposite, I think I was really naive about marriage and men because my dad is such a good egg and my parents had such a good marriage.
I didn't understand and spot the red flags with my ex..and in all honesty he was nice until I was pregnant and then the abuse began - this is a very common pattern

I made a great decision but that was largely because my father was a complete arsehole and I avoided any man who reminded me of him even slightly. But yeah, I take your point.

I think also a lot depends on the age of the child. This idea of minding being apart from a parent presumably relates to younger children - as a teen, moving around would just be a hassle. I was more interested in spending time with my friends, and as people have discussed, moving from house to house can make that harder.

Totally see that. And, on the flip side, people knowing exactly what they didn't want because they saw that modelled too. 🙋🏽‍♀️

But ultimately, any marriage can end in divorce no matter how picky you are about who you marry. People don't stay the same for 60 years of their life and I'm pretty sure most married couples will face that fork in the road at some point.

We can only do the best with what we've got. And this is why this thread's got under my skin: why judge people for custody arrangements when, at the end of the day, these are people just trying to do the best for their kids in a situation they probably didn't want for anyone.

Saying it's largely luck doesn't explain why statistics show that you're more likely to divorce if there is divorce in your friend group, or if you live together before marriage (I'm assuming that one is linked how religious a couple is), or if you've been married before. If it's all down to luck then why in the U.S. are third marriages 73% likely to end in divorce but first marriages only 43%? https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/divorce/divorce-statistics/