Ex partner wants our son 4 days of the week!

[Kimberleysmith]

My ex partner and I have separated.

To cut a very long story short, all of my family live in the Midlands and I've been living with my partner up North for 8 years. I am wanting to move back for obvious reasons; emotional support, and to be closer to my family who can help me with my almost 1 year old.

My ex partner is not happy at me wanting to move back, but what is more frustrating is, he works shifts - so four days on and then four days off, he is adamant he is entitled to have our son on his four days off?!

It doesn't matter how many times I've tried to explain this cannot happen, he will not agree to anything else. We are heading for mediation, but I'd like to know in other Mum's experience, what could be a suitable arrangement here? Would I be accommodating if I suggested two days with an over night stay?

Thank you in advance 

[quote CelestialGalaxy]@LittleMysSister but what is OPs ex proposed compromise?[/quote]
What is OPs proposed compromise?

“Men split and move to wherever they want all the time, but woebetide a woman even considering prioritising her needs.”

The men who move away from their children by choice are bad parents and frankly, horrible people. (Note I said by choice, I am excluding people serving in the military or those forced to move because it’s the only way they can provide financially for their child)

@LittleMysSister

Men split and move to wherever they want all the time, but woebetide a woman even considering prioritising her needs.

But they don't usually take their children with them!! I'm sure he wouldn't care if OP was moving but leaving their child with him and she was the one faced with only seeing him every other weekend or less.

I can't believe so many women have so much internalised mysoginy that they'll spend days arguing that a single mum can't move nearer to her family because it might inconvenience her ex.

It's not misogynistic to think that fathers are as important as mothers in a child's life.

I can't believe that so many think it's OK for a mum to decide that she's taking the child away and the dad just has to suck up whatever contact she decides to let him have, because 4 days a week away from her child is too much for her. Yet it's acceptable for him to have so much less than that?

I'm not sure if you are doing it intentionally, or projecting your own/your partners' experiences through your messages, but your language about "whatever contact she decides to let him have" etc etc, suggesting that the OP is doing this out of spite rather than because she is prioritising what is best for the child. 50/50 is not the gold standard for every child. Parents can and do have excellent relationships with their children with all kinds of frequency of access. It is about quality, not quantity.

I am my sons primary carer, always have been. He is almost 2 and still breastfeeding. His Dad lives 90 mins away and sees him 3 days a month. They have a great relationship and our current arrangement is absolutely what is best for our child. He has the stability of nursery and a secure home, I now am local to my family again so we have a support network, our living costs are substantially lower so I now have some financial stability and can provide for my son in the way he needs and deserves. None of that would have been possible if I'd continued living 5 mins up the road from his father (for his own convenience too I might add), so while 50/50 access might have been more feasible if I remained living there, no way would it have been better for our son as I would likely have not been able to even afford to live. It is about context and personal circumstance, and this OP shouldn't be crucified for wanting to move closer to her family. This may not only provide her and their child with the support network that almost all mums need, but also financial stability, job security, etc etc. All of those absolute essentials - roof over head, food, job, etc are way way way more important to a child than some 50/50 arrangement because thats supposedly what the parents are 'entitled' to.

@nugget396 I definitely haven't crucified OP for wanting to move, I have said multiple times that I understand why she'd want to move 100%, and I absolutely don't think she's doing anything out of spite.

In her shoes, I would move but not until we'd figured out this contact stuff first. I would definitely allow my ex to have our child on his days off as long as he could tell me his shift pattern a few weeks in advance so I could plan my time with our child too, and on the condition he paid half of full-time childcare to allow me to hold down a job. I think that is a totally fair compromise, she can't offer more than that and he would be unfair to turn it down.

I am not criticising OP, what she wants is what everyone would want in her shoes. I just think in her natural upset following their split, OP is wanting to get away and be near her own family asap without losing any time with her child herself, and she's making a decision based on only her own needs without considering the realities of making a move of this distance. She is creating a situation where it's going to be incredibly difficult for their son to have any regular time with his dad at all unless she compromises on allowing her ex to have their child on his days off.

@CelestialGalaxy He needs to compromise by not fighting OP's move if she agrees things can be arranged so he can still have their child regularly. If he wants to be able to have their son as and when his days off fall then he needs to pay half of full-time childcare to allow OP to work. He needs to be able to provide his shifts in advance so nursery and DS himself can know when he will be in. He could also agree not to take their son for all of his 4 days off every time, where it falls that OP wouldn't get much time with him around her own work.

Obviously this won't work once schools starts but OP will already be established in the new area by then so wouldn't be expected to move back, plus it gives the dad 3/4 years notice that the arrangement will obviously change and he may need to change his job in order to be able to have his son regularly.

There are ways everyone can get a bit of what they want if they just work together, rather than both insisting the other absolutely cannot have what they're asking for.

There is nothing to stop mom from moving as many times as she wants. The idea that to be allowed to be a father, you need to quit your job, follow mom around and be at your beck and call so when she decides you can have a few hours you are there to take them. But you also need to pay her maintenance and her childcare - but quit your job and move to whereever she is and wherever she goes.

Thankfully courts now see fathers as having more value than some on this thread and they aren't going to tell him he needs to quit his job and follow her around and hope she lets him see the child on occasion. Courts believe it is in the best interest of the child to have both parents in their lives and so they work to make that happen. This is why custody is done through the courts.

You might think that fathers don't matter and all a child needs is their mother but there are a lot of adults in therapy because they didn't have relationships with their dads as children / teens. Fathers aren't as disposable and insignificant as some want to think

@Midlifemusings

There is nothing to stop mom from moving as many times as she wants. The idea that to be allowed to be a father, you need to quit your job, follow mom around and be at your beck and call so when she decides you can have a few hours you are there to take them. But you also need to pay her maintenance and her childcare - but quit your job and move to whereever she is and wherever she goes.

Thankfully courts now see fathers as having more value than some on this thread and they aren't going to tell him he needs to quit his job and follow her around and hope she lets him see the child on occasion. Courts believe it is in the best interest of the child to have both parents in their lives and so they work to make that happen. This is why custody is done through the courts.

You might think that fathers don't matter and all a child needs is their mother but there are a lot of adults in therapy because they didn't have relationships with their dads as children / teens. Fathers aren't as disposable and insignificant as some want to think

No Courts will not say that. However NO mother will be expected to accommodate anybody rotating shifts either. It's not OPS responsibility as she TOO has her OWN life.

At least the dad can do is ask for set days come on.

@BunNcheese

As I said in an earlier post, I know nurses who have custody schedules that 100% take into account their shift work schedules. So yes, the courts do look at that.

And why are so many posts saying dad needs to accommodate mom if no parent should ever accommodate other other once they separate? Maybe he should just take the child and move away to where his family lives and can support him. It seems most would be fine with that as they don't think he would have any duty to give a damn about mom or her relationship with the child or do anything to support that.

@Midlifemusings a lot of mums would have a flexi contract if they were a nurse. I went to Court myself this year also work in a hospital.

So if OP presented that she is staying up North to the judge she would not be expected to accommodate dad with him working all different days each work. Unfortunately it's not practical when a child is between 2 houses.

To some extent the other parent accommodates the main parent as they are juggling the full load... nursery, school and sick days.... its usually falls on the resident parent.

Even nursery want parents to specify days you cannot just change from week to week.. IS OP expected to fund the nursery too?

[quote BunNcheese]@Midlifemusings a lot of mums would have a flexi contract if they were a nurse. I went to Court myself this year also work in a hospital.

So if OP presented that she is staying up North to the judge she would not be expected to accommodate dad with him working all different days each work. Unfortunately it's not practical when a child is between 2 houses.

To some extent the other parent accommodates the main parent as they are juggling the full load... nursery, school and sick days.... its usually falls on the resident parent.

Even nursery want parents to specify days you cannot just change from week to week.. IS OP expected to fund the nursery too?[/quote]
But in 50/50 care either could be the resident parent. Why can't dad be the resident parent?

It blows my mind that a woman grows and births a baby only for other women to be like "why can the dad be resident parent?!"
This is a baby. Not an older child. A baby who needs his mother more than 4 days a week. She's never said the dad can't see him regularly but why is she being held hostage to his demands and his life? She can't be near her family? She has to find a job and a new home and she has to find childcare and fit around the ex's shifts? Oh and she will rarely see her own child because on her days he will be in childcare so she can work.

Nah fuck that. A man can have a great relationship with his child even 90 minutes away if he bothers his arse at all to make the effort. The child would benefit more from 2 happy parents not one incredibly stressed out one. I'm from a military family and only saw my dad for a few weeks every six months and I love my dad and love chatting to him over coffee when I visit as an adult. As someone else said it's quality not quantity.

Why can't*

She's never said the dad can't see him regularly but why is she being held hostage to his demands and his life? She can't be near her family? She has to find a job and a new home and she has to find childcare and fit around the ex's shifts?

Firstly she chose to move away and make her life and family in a new area with this man. Relationships split, and once you have a baby with with someone you are tied to them and their lives.

Secondly it’s unlikely she will be looking for a new home. Generally the mum stays in the family home with the child while dad moves out. He may need to move in with his parents at least temporarily while everything is sorted out. If she moves she will be the one looking for a new home, and work will become a more immediate need for deposits etc.

Staying near to the childs father may actually give her more help- he has 4 days off, and shifts mean it will be easier for him to do doctors appt’s, school plays, child is sick etc, if she cannot get time off work easily.

As for contact time they need to work it out so they both get reasonable access. Upping 90 mins away won’t do that. If they can work it he could have access on days she works mid week, allowing her to have quality time on weekends, and less stress trying to get the child to nursery on work days.

Once the child is at school it’s easier to do odd days. Until them they may have to just pay for a full time place and use it when they need. I works shifts and this is what i did.

She's never said the dad can't see him regularly but why is she being held hostage to his demands and his life?...A man can have a great relationship with his child even 90 minutes away if he bothers his arse at all to make the effort. The child would benefit more from 2 happy parents not one incredibly stressed out one.

I think the issue is that 90 mins distance + shift work means that it's impossible for the dad to see the child regularly unless OP lets him have him for his 4 days off. Which in her posts, she has said she's not willing to do.

The way I think of it is either OP moves away and is more flexible as to when her ex can have their child, or she doesn't move and is able to be more formal with contact. Being nearby would potentially not limit the dad to having their son on his days off (eg he could have him for a couple of hours in the afternoon between night shifts, or see him for dinner after work as he gets older). I don't think you can move away and also say that you're not going to be a bit flexible with contact arrangements.

As I said, if I were OP I'd move, but I'd also not fight my ex having our child at the only times available to him at such distance.

@ShaneTheThird
It blows my mind that a woman grows and births a baby only for other women to be like "why can the dad be resident parent?!"

But why can't a man be the resident parent? This is his child as well.
Are you saying that adoptive parents are not proper parents because they didnt 'grow and birth' a child?

Nah fuck that. A man can have a great relationship with his child even 90 minutes away if he bothers his arse at all to make the effort. The child would benefit more from 2 happy parents not one incredibly stressed out one.

So how does the child get to school when its time if they are staying at their fathers home 90mins away?

I'm from a military family and only saw my dad for a few weeks every six months and I love my dad and love chatting to him over coffee when I visit as an adult. As someone else said it's quality not quantity.
Great that it worked out for you, I imagine your parents had a good relationship and were not divorced/no longer together?

The ex in this case is unlikely to want to keep 50/50 if we are completely honest, but in the best interests of the child, OP should stay open

You need to get yourself moved close to family as soon as you can. You won't be able to agree anything with your ex as he just wants what he wants- so get moved ASAP. Then sort access from there.
He can see him while he's off now but at some stage your son will start nursery and school so things will have to change again then.

I assume you'll need family support to work etc. So not unreasonable to move.

[quote BonesInTheOcean]@ShaneTheThird
It blows my mind that a woman grows and births a baby only for other women to be like "why can the dad be resident parent?!"

But why can't a man be the resident parent? This is his child as well.
Are you saying that adoptive parents are not proper parents because they didnt 'grow and birth' a child?

Nah fuck that. A man can have a great relationship with his child even 90 minutes away if he bothers his arse at all to make the effort. The child would benefit more from 2 happy parents not one incredibly stressed out one.

So how does the child get to school when its time if they are staying at their fathers home 90mins away?

I'm from a military family and only saw my dad for a few weeks every six months and I love my dad and love chatting to him over coffee when I visit as an adult. As someone else said it's quality not quantity.
Great that it worked out for you, I imagine your parents had a good relationship and were not divorced/no longer together?

The ex in this case is unlikely to want to keep 50/50 if we are completely honest, but in the best interests of the child, OP should stay open[/quote]
I'm not talking about adoptive parents though. I'm talking about a birth mother with a baby under a year old and posters acting incredulous that she doesn't want to leave her baby at all.

And personally no my parents didn't have a great marriage as my dad's an alcoholic. That has no bearing on my relationship with them.

@ShaneTheThird 'Growing and birthing a child' doesn't give you more rights over it than the other parent? I don't think I have any more parental rights over my ex-husband just because I was the one to carry a child. What a bizarre way to think. That because you had a child in your womb you have the trump card. What about babies born to surrogates, or adopted?

I'm not talking about adoptive parents though. I'm talking about a birth mother with a baby under a year old and posters acting incredulous that she doesn't want to leave her baby at all.

I'm not incredulous that she doesn't want to leave her baby at all, I completely get it - nobody wants to. But surely that's the reality you have to accept when you split with the child's other parent?

Their child is not just OP's to take away, particularly without any proper discussion of how the dad will have any access at all given that he can't do every weekend/every other. OP needs to give a little ground in order to get what she wants here.

Ok I'm not saying the dad shouldn't have access to his child. Of course he should. And of course op needs to sort out a proper plan.

All I'm saying is it's perfectly normal and natural for op to not want to hand her baby over for 4 days a week. What normal mother would want that? I'm also saying legally op is allowed to move 90 minutes away with the child as she's not leaving the country. I know of someone who lives in Luton and her ex in Scotland and the children have to get a flight each week to their dad.

ShaneTheThird I agree with you, I do think it's completely normal and natural for OP not to want to hand her child over 4 days a week. My point is just that it's the same for his dad too, but so many don't seem to care that OP making this move and refusing to let him have their son on his 4 days off effectively means it will be very hard for him to see him regularly at all.

I just don't think it's a given that just because OP is mum and not dad that her feelings of not wanting to be without her child trump his feelings of not wanting to be without him. Obviously they both need to accept they'll be spending more time without him than they imagined when they became parents, but it should be an open discussion of how to make it work, before OP moves.

OP initially posted here that she wants to move 90 mins away and also that her ex wants their child 4 days a week but that absolutely can't happen. She is concerned because she doesn't want to be without him for 4 days a week, and also that her ex's 4 days off might sometimes be when she is off work so her time with their child may be in the evenings after work sometimes - yet surely that is preferable to not seeing him at all, which would be the case for the ex if he is not allowed to have him on his days off as he won't have the option of seeing him after/before work at that distance?

I just think it's not fair that things that are seen as completely acceptable for the dad to suffer are actually worse than what OP is worrying about for herself.

So @Kimberleysmith what did you decide to do

*We are being dictated by my ex partners working shift pattern, his life. He can have our son for his four days off say Friday-Monday, he'll then be back with me Tuesday-Friday (I will be at work) and then back with Dad Saturday-Tuesday?

When do I see my son? On an evening for an hour whilst putting him to bed?*

Isn't that also the case if you ex was to have him every weekend (which isn't too unusual)? You'd only see your son in the week. Four days on and four off means there will be weekends when you have him continually.

It sounds like you are trying to come up with excuses.

If you need to move near family for support, you will both need to work through where he goes to school and how you will get him there!