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?

But that's what I mean - I didn't see it as my home, and that was never a problem. It didn't make me feel like my dad loved me any less, and I would have resented being forced to try to have/to pretend to believe I had two places that were "home". For me at least, that's not how the concept of home works.

@Tammygirl12 what can we do if the other parent insists on 50/50? Apart from feel bad about it

I think more divorced parents would admit to the to-ing and fro-ing being shit if it were the parents who were doing the to-ing and fro-ing every few days and the children got to stay put.

Parents, not kids, should be the ones moving in and out every few days.

Extroverts v introverts. Introverts are far more likely to want their own quiet, familiar space and things to go back to in order to recharge at the end of a busy day.

I agree op. Apparently the new way is to let the children stay in the home and the parents come and go

I think the problem is with these threads is that some people who have no experience of being divorced or being child of divorce, put their two cents in whilst having no idea of the realities of the situation. Divorced parents are not allowed to make mistakes or wrong choices unlike nuclear families. We are held to a much higher standard than couples, I’ve noticed.

I think it's always going to be a both / and, not either / or. Parents are often just doing the best they can with shared care arrangements, AND there will be things about that best that totally sucks for the child. It's possible to acknowledge both the impossible decisions for parents who divorce, and the pain of the child growing up between worlds.

Different situation, but DH grew up in a loving, intact family living an international life due to his Dad's job. Multiple moves between western and non-western, developing and developed countries. His parents did the best they could, AND their best didn't stop their kids being traumatized from the moves in ways that weren't known or predicted at the time. DH had some amazing experiences and some distinct advantages from growing up this way, AND also had some really shit experiences and some very distinct disadvantages from the same. I'm not sure he would change his childhood exactly, but both of us have agreed - based on their experiences and the now-known risks of that lifestyle for kids, the difficulties that arise when those kids become adults - we'd never inflict it on our own kids. Ever.

Above all we've agreed our kids MUST have agency and a voice. In shared care households that should be paramount, and for parents to be aware that what works for them as a family may give rise to painful experiences and hard conversations when children become adults. Loving your kids means giving space for those conversations, for both experiences to be true and valid, for parents to have done their best AND their children to have suffered damage anyway. The only way out is through - that's all you can do, make space and room for it all.

When most dads don’t know their kids teacher or doctor’s names, getting 50/50 custody is laughable - they only do it to avoid paying child maintenance to the person who does all the maintaining.

I do 7 on 7 off and it works well. Sorry that your parents insisted on the split they did but I’ve talked to my sons and they actually like it, yeah we ferry stuff to each others and I don’t let new shoes I’ve paid for go there (their dog chews) but it works great in this co-parenting family.

Op i voted YABU. As its not tbe 50/50 that is the issue it was the way your parents handled it.

I did 1 weekend in 3 with my father. Result is a distant sort of kind uncle relationship with him. It didn't work and my mother did parental alienation I dont even k ow she was aware it was more I was "hers" and he didnt get a say..

Screwed me up and took many years of theraphy to feel ok about it.

My friend did 50 50 one week on and off. Their boys have close loving relationships with both parents. I think because they were able to put their boys feelings before their own and they coparented well.

I think the ability to coparent will always be the key. With or without divorce.

Nobody has a perfect childhood. Everyone has experiences that were negative. Nobody ever marries and has children with someone in the hope that they will divorce so that they can give their children the positive experience of having separated parents. There is no spin you can give to any arrangement that gets around the fact it’s a damaging experience for all involved when relationships involving children break down. At its best, separating can be considerably better than parents staying together, but it’s never good per se to have parents who separate, whether the children stay put in one home or move around from one parent to the other. On that basis, it’s a question of minimising the harm and making the best of less than ideal circumstances. How you achieve that depends on the particular situation, and sometimes 50:50 is making the best of it (and sometimes it really isn’t).

YANBU

My sisters ex seems to have the kids mainly so he can avoid the financial burden of CM.

He also uses it as an opportunity to manipulate and gaslight the kids. Its absolutely toxic because he left for the affair partner but refuses to take any responsibility.

My sister was oblivious to his serial adultery until he left. Then it all came out with ghosts from the past emerging to tell all. 😔

And what the kids now have to put up with from him with his constantly resentful behaviour, obsessed with every penny, telling the kids that my sister has "ruined both his and AP life"

I worry that the assumption of 50/50 has landed many mothers with a "Solomons baby" dilemma where they are damned if they do and damned if they don't. They just can't win. 😔

Ex-h and I do 50/50 childcare - with the 223 schedule. Been this way for 7yrs. He remarried a few yrs ago and his wife is amazing, and has always ensured (along with my ex) that the kids have lovely bedrooms and everything they need at theirs.

All adults get on brilliantly - we’re all good friends and often spend whole afternoons having a cuppa together, and spend all special occasions together in one of the homes. In fact, me and my DC2’s step mum took my DC2 on a day out together last month.

The kids have duplicates of everything, and if there’s something they’ve forgotten (football boots, school bag, keys etc) then we help them sort it. We deliberately live a few streets apar, in almost identical houses. The kids have started coming and going between the two homes as they please.

The kids have a pet in each home, and look forward to spending time with each one.

The kids are (by everyone’s views) hugely well-adjusted, relaxed, funny, happy, have lots of hobbies, and are doing well at school. They brag to their mates at school that they get two summer holidays and two main presents at Christmas. 🫣

Of course I feel endlessly guilty and full of sorrow that we couldn’t give them the standard nuclear family unit…. But given the divorce had to happen then I think we’ve managed to mitigate the disruption to the kids pretty well.

So…. Every scenario is different. And with respect, OP, given you’re lucky to not have experienced divorcing / breakdown of your children’s family unit etc then I’d refrain from any judgement on what you hypothetically would do in my situation.

Yes 50/50 is for the benefit of the parents. Not the child. Everybody needs a Safe Base. Basic psychology. 50/50 gives no opportunity for the child to have their own Safe Base. Cruel.

Total crap. Even if you do EOW you’d still be moving between two homes. You’d just not really be spending much meaningful time with the other parent and the relationship would suffer. 50/50 doesn’t stop anyone having a safe base at all.

Obviously with the cc-ing I previously check the parents involved are ok with each other knowing their email addresses. Otherwise I'd be breaking privacy rules.

This sums up my thinking I feel.

I would have been so much happier with one solid base, and I don't think it needed to mean I would never have seen my father either. I could have spent alternate weekends at his house - and actually, what would have stopped him coming to take us for tea midweek? Why couldn't we still have attended church Sunday mornings with him most weeks? What's to say that in summer holidays we couldn't have spent a full two weeks at his house or on a holiday? I probably wouldn't have been so adverse to leaving home like I am now - if I had HAD a home, and wasn't always forced to leave it every couple of days.

Instead, we were physically in his house 50% of the time - mostly in the company of any female he could find to babysit when I was younger, then alone when older until at least 19.30. Packing up a bag just to maybe be in the same room for 2 hours or so?

Had I lived solidly with my mother, but had a father who I visited, and who made a effort to see me and - crucially - include me in his life (in a way that made him take the burden of inconvenience) I am certain I would have been happier.

My mother was very possessive over her time with us - so under the actual set up I cannot picture her allowing him to take us to church etc on 'her' days; but I don't think she would have been so rigid if she had us home every night. She also might have been less stressed if she wasn't paying 100% for children she had 50% - with a man who was very wealthy.

I also simply can't picture this anyway though, as I can't imagine my dad ever having gone out of his way to see us (rather than have us just take a bus to his house and exist in it).

I'll not be back to the thread now anyway. It's given me food for thought, and if anything, I feel reassured remembering that actually - I can ensure my situation never happens for my child, because Im able to be the weekend and visit parent, or the majority parent and either way I know I'll do a much better job than my own dad did. It's quite freeing to realise I'm not him!

It's really shit for kids when the mum decides she wants to leave her angry/sweary/emotionally abusive/cold-hearted/lazy husband, knowing that she is free of him 100% of her life, but her ex-husband will get 50/50 time with her kids.

If I had a husband like that, I wouldn't divorce him while my kids are small. There is no way I'd leave my kids alone with a shit adult.

It’s not really my place to have an opinion because my parents are still together and so are my husband and I. But I wanted to say that does sound difficult to cope with for a kid and I’m not surprised you value certainty and your own space now.
I’m always impressed by families where the children stay full time in the family home and the parents take turns to sleep elsewhere. I know a family who do this and it seems to work really well. The parents do co-parent amicably though which is obviously essential (it would be appalling if your fellow co-parent always left the house in a filthy state when you came back to it!).

Very few of the problems you mention are to do with 50/50 - nearly all are because your parents couldn’t get their act together and cooperate in your best interests

So the non resident parent should not contribute financially then! Do you really think child benefit will cover all the child needs!!

Given your comment at 7.20 @5050hell, I take it you were unable to listen/process/take in all the posters detailing that 50:50 works for them and that this is entirely about your father being selfish/useless and not about 50:50? That was a nice waste of time then.

Through a school I worked at i know if a family who did 50/50, literally a week on/off swapped on a wednesday after school.At school there was no issue at all, the children seemed happy and adjusted to the set up. Speaking to the Mun , they hammered out stuff like homework, activities, parties etc all expected to occur regardless of which parent they were with.
She was a force to be reckoned with and refused to put up 'with any of his crap'( he cheated) I think it was one if the reasons they did a week at at a time, so she wouldn't become the default parent.
Thus was when they were at primary, I can see more issues when teenagers become more independent and want to do their own thing.

If it has to be done, I think 7/7 is best. A week at one then a week at the other. Not sure why thus isn't standard.
Separation in non abusive situations is never positive for the children, let's face it. Not only do they lose their nuclear family, but they are often forced to accommodate new partners and their kids.

Moving every few days has to be ridiculously stressful.