To wonder about 50/50

[fiftyfiftyy]

I know 50/50 gets a lot of negativity on here but I actually think it sounds ideal, AIBU to think im the only mum that would have wanted 50/50 (ex would have never been interested) or are there any other mums that have chosen it? I have only seen negativity about it but surely I can’t be the only one?

So I have one friend and one family member for whom it has worked for them and the children. But they both went all out to make it work and there was enough money. So they lived close enough to exes that kids could walk home from school to whichever house, they had equal amounts of stuff and proper bedrooms at each house and there was effective co-parenting. I think all these things have to be in place for it to be the best thing for the kids. And even then, by about 14/15, the kids had a parent whose company they preferred. But then that happens in families where parents are together, it’s just less obvious. I think if you can make it work it’s brilliant but it HAS to be about what’s best for the kids. When my parents separated I would have absolutely hated it but I was not close to my Dad and although he was a lovely man he had no idea how to parent. So for me it was definitely better to spend the vast majority of my time with my mum. In my case things got hugely more complicated when my mum moved in with a man who had three children,
who used to do every Wednesday night and every other weekend. That was a total
shitshow and incredibly stressful for me and my sister - but again ultimately it was about money as my mum had none and the man she moved in with had a lot (and she was not getting any money from my Dad). All of this an incredibly long-winded way of saying that context is everything! But the one thing is always to remember that it isn’t about what you want, or what you’re “entitled” to, but about what is best for the kids, taking into account practical and financial constraints.

I definitely think 50/50 would have been best for my children and it’s great to hear so many children have chosen this themselves and enjoy it.

50/50 is quite common and more so now in real life. MN is another world!

I live kind of like that. I have my city apartment and then I have a house in the countryside near where I grew up and I swap between them. I spend roughly 2 weeks in each home and then swap. Everytime I come to each place I come home, and it's the same for all the kids I know who lives 50-50. It's not that one place is home and other is away, they are both home, so it's nothing like having been on holiday and come home from that.

Several of my friends who divorced bloody useless men found they suddenly became Dad of the year when they found out 50/50 meant no CS payments
In all cases the 50/50 involved time (often with GP's) but no actual parenting

Nothing wrong with spending time with extended family I know loads of mums who have lots of help from grandparents and kids spend loads of time there (single mums)

Many mothers are better at parenting than fathers but the fathers dont acknowledge it / pay for it. In those cases on paper it would be better for the kids to spend more time/ all their time with the mother, but as she isnt going to get any kind of support with that from their other parent she is at risk of breakdown, burn out etc. 50/50 may mean kids get some less good parenting but it can also mean that the mum gets space to recovery; the dad can be forced to step up, at least a bit, purely by her absence, even if she is actually still covering the whole mental load. It isn’t a disaster if there is a slight trade off that results in mum being able to survive, or even have a slightly good time occasionally. A lot of these partnerships broke down in the first place because everything and everyone got made her responsibility. Putting kids first is one thing, but continually demanding 360 top performance of women while men do fuck all is something else.

I think generally the exes want 50/50 to avoid paying child support. So in those cases, the women involved aren't likely dealing with a reasonable person that they can amicably co-parent with. The ex likely hasn't been significantly involved in the raising of the children so far, so the women has less faith in their genuine interest in parenting, which can lead to excessive screen time and a lack of discipline. All this makes their time with their own children more stressful.

Yes, in an ideal world, there are many benefits to 50/50, where both parents are involved, supportive and can work together. It can enable both parents to have time to focus on work without worrying about childcare, leaving parenting time to focus on the kids. However, practically it doesn't work for many families (and probably those most likely to write on here due to the major problems they are having, happy people are less likely to post on an AIBU forum).

I also live like it between my own place and my partners

Money shouldn’t come into it from either side… I’d rather have 50:50 than any maintenance payments

I just wouldnt want to not see my DC half the week!

We're just about to start 50/50 and I'm like you. I can see the other positives, I can get all the boring housework and admin done when I don't have the kids, can do gym/swim etc, and do longer days at work, then on the days I have the kids I can work shorter hours, do school drop off and pick up and be focused on them in the evenings and weekend days instead of needing to do everything else

Exactly! Sounds perfect!

I’d gladly not 😂 (only half joking)

This is very easy to say if you are on somewhat equal terms earnings wise as your ex. Please remember many are not. Some may have made a family decision for one of them to stop or cut down on work, in order to support the others higher pressure and higher earnings career. So no CMS has a big impact on their quality of life and what they can provide their children.

Others are financially abused, which is a particular issue when then moving on to managing a separation and having 50/50 threatened in order to avoid maintenance. As this is what it is. A threat of taking the kids away more from their ex in order to 'save' money. (caveated to add, obviously not all threaten this, others will have perfectly reasonable discussions about it)

I have someone close to me going through a very difficult separation just now, so have been researching a bit about how to support her. I have been astounded to hear about all the stories of (primarily women) going through fights to avoid CMS, 'taking the kids away' only to not actually parent them. Yes, 50/50 gives more opportunity to work, assuming they have reasonable earning potential, but it is very much an ideal world and there are many people it just doesn't work for, or it is in place as a method to control and abuse the other parent with no regards to the care of the children.

The bird nesting idea mentioned by some where children live in one place and the parents swop in and out when they stay with them sounds great.

But it means the parents having two homes (well three between them), which to a lot of us is as unobtainable as sending your kids to a private school. You might as well talk about visiting the moon.

Neither did I, but then neither did my ex and he was a great dad so why would I take that from him? Or deprive my children of having that time with him.

My primary aged DC chose it after a few months of me having them about 70% of the time. They missed their dad! ExH is an engaged, caring, and interested parent and we get on well. Our feelings about our failed marriage have always been secondary to our DC's needs, and we work well as a coparenting team. At ages 18 and 16 the DC still choose a week on/week off, despite being told that they can choose wherever they want to live, now.

I imagine that 50/50 is much much harder on everyone when one parent is flakey or disengaged, and I don't disbelieve anyone who says it's been a negative for either them or their child.

I have my kids full time and get NO maintenance, I’d actually be far better off financially with 50/50!

Exactly this. See it all the time. Another excuse for feckless men to do fck all and pay nothing, in many cases.

This is simply untrue.

Bird nesting is by far cheapest option for us and had to make big changes financially to make this possible.

Money’s not the reason we chose to do it but would likely have landed on this anyway.. otherwise it’s one of us renting a tiny place while the other kept the house (and the rental is too small for the children to live in..) We only have 2 properties. Selling up and buying 2 smaller places or one buying the other out is not within our means.

Of course not but too many men push for 50/50 care to avoid CS and then dump the kids on their parents

PP seems to have a setup where she and her ex have one property they share (as there will only be one of them at a time living there). So you would have maybe a two-bed flat or something for parents, and then the family home, not necessarily a home each plus the family home.

God, some of you have clearly mixed with the wrong men.

From what I can tell many women don’t want 50:50, unless they know they won’t get it.

so deadbeat dad, no interest, and mums would love it.

but when the reality hits and dad actually steps up, it’s suddenly “he’s only doing it to get out of maintenance”, or they realise that the cut in CMS means they’ll struggle financially, as having the kids most of the time + CMS is a lot easier than 50:50 and no CMS, as the rent doesn’t change, or the bills.

that and who really wants to be away from their kids that much. Being in a main home for the school week is much easier than having two homes to move between.

i can see how “nesting” sounds great in theory, but again that only applies if both of you have the same standards re. Housework etc. coming back to a pile of washing and two days worth of housework every time you switch homes would make it unworkable.