Custody for SAHM (Dad asking)

[justbeingadad]

Wife and I are getting divorced - she ended it a few months ago, but at the moment it still makes financial sense to live together - we lead very separate lives though. Not sure it's significant, but she is already seeing someone else.

As she is currently a stay at home mum with a small side income of a couple of hundred £/month, she has indicated that she expects to get custody of the children following divorce and I see them only 1 or 2 days a week. She won't be staying in the family home, we'll most likely sell it as there isn't enough money to run this + another house without some serious compromises which otherwise wouldn't be required.

My job has historically meant I had to work away a lot - 4/5 days a week, sometimes 3 weeks a month, however this shouldn't be the case in the future and I would change jobs and take a significant pay cut if it comes down to it so that I have an equal relationship with my children.

Am I being naive to believe that we should be going for 50/50 custody?

I'm very concerned that over time my children will see me as someone they "visit".

Anyone have any experience of this - does a SAHM have an elevated claim to custody based on the fact they've stayed at home with the children more? Kids will probably be 4 & 7 by the time this is all sorted.

Let's face facts here. You split recently and she's already seeing someone new. You are not responsible to make sure she's able to live, only that the kids are. This time could of been spent working out a new source of income or preparing the kids but it seems a new relationship has taken priority so essentially she has made her decisions on what to do post split so you make yours.

If you want to have 50/50 care of your kids, you go for 50/50. If it means lowering your income but still being able to provide for your kids, what's the issue? I assume when you worked away, you had more time at home as well? So instead of working 5 full 8/9 hour days and getting 2 days off a week, you would work away for 4/5 days then get 3 or 4 days off at home where you spent that time with the kids?

You are looking at what is best for you and your kids relationship here. Your ex wife is of no importance anymore. She has moved on, she ended the relationship so she can look after herself.

If you had ended the relationship and she had suffered due to your decision, I would say be fair and help her financially etc but she has moved on!

Do you live in two homes yourself then AMAM? How's that working out for you?

@Tactfulish

Thanks - nice to hear that it is possible, although I am seeing a different side to things now and do appreciate that 50/50 in our scenario is probably not realistic.

I suppose my concern is less that I want an exact 50/50 split but that I want an equal stake in parenting as a whole. I don't (won't) be the dad who essentially has no responsibility for their children beyond CM payments and a trip to the cinema on a Saturday. That's not who I am and that's what I'm gravely concerned about her creating. I don't want her to be making significant decisions about the children without consulting me, just as I would not.

I'm convinced it would have been easier to fix our marriage than go through this

I am very uninformed about this - but is there such a thing whereby maybe we do 5/2 or 4/3 nights but we have equal parenting rights - is that a thing? A scenario whereby we both maintain full parental rights, but for logistical reasons, we split the accommodation unequally?

I wonder why you are so concerned about what you want and your rights and so unconcerned about what’s best for the children?

You have full, equal parenting rights even if you saw the kids once a year but if you disagreed with her (say on schooling), legally she'd have more say as the kids are with her on more school nights. You could take her to court if she was being outrageous but it would ruin the co-parenting relationship.

If she is motivated by money then she'd hopefully agree to you having more contact as long as you didn't cut the maintenance. So you pay her maintenance as if she has the kids 6 days a week but in reality she might only have them 4 days a week iyswim.

If you already have parental reponsibility then you do have equal parenting rights.

However, the resident parent is expected to make most of the day to day, practical decisions for the children. The courts don't tend to micromanage beyond that. You would need to work out the details with your ex. You have to try mediation first anyhow.

Morven - it's best for kids to have 2 involved parents and it sounds like OP is an involved Dad. This post is him thinking out loud and planning what the future might look like for him and the kids which is perfectly reasonable imo. It takes work for a NRP to have a strong relationship with their kids and hopefully he'll remain close with them.
He has been reasonable in realising that 50/50 isn't a possibility for him but there are families that can make it work.

I think you have full equal rights regardless of how long they stay with you.

You seem to be pre-supposing that you will things to argue about in future. I can only think of a few things that could be flash points - schools, taking children out of schools for holidays, vaccinations (but they should mostly be done by now). What are you worried about losing in terms of choices for the DC?

So you're currently earning over £100k a year. In a job involving a LOT of travel. Realistically you could only have maintained that because your wife was a SAHM.

So don't try and argue she had no desire to work - it was a joint decision you must have been happy with as it meant your career could continue.

Quitting to earn less than half that would be a shitty thing to do.

@RuffleCrow

As I work away so much I am more than familiar with what it feels like to live in a hotel never mind a 2nd home.

@AMAM8916

I understand your point but I disagree. A miserable mother because I'm being too single-minded is not healthy for my children or my future relationship with their mother. I have lots of reasons to dislike her and not be interested in her needs but that attitude doesn't seem to actually benefit anyone, least of all the children.

@M0RVEN

Not entirely sure what you're basing that statement on, but I think it's clear my concern is ensuring my children have the best relationship with me as possible. To critique me for wanting to be "allowed" an active role in my children's upbringing seems like you're my stbxw!

@VeThings

Generally we've got (had) pretty similar views on the core parts of parenting so I hope that won't change, however, things like changing schools, say if they were unhappy etc, how we deal with non-urgent/optional/unclear medical decisions.

In a scenario where we had, say 4/3 nights to her/me, and she decided to move away from the area (say 100+ miles) for example, where does that sit with custody agreements? Can she actually do that if we have joint custody?

While your intention is admirable, 50-50 isn't often the best solution for children - they are generally happier with one base they call home, and a comfortable and welcoming set-up when they spend time with the other parent.

What might be more beneficial to your relationship in the long term is spending extended periods of time as their main carer as they grow up. Taking long leave to have them for a whole month in the summer, for example, or scaling your work down for a year or two so they can live mainly with you for that time.

Would you consider those sorts of arrangements?

I would recommend you talk about the nesting option with your wife.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.equitablemediation.com/blog/nesting-plans-bird-nest-parenting%3fhs_amp=true

@titchy

Oh so so narrow-minded.

Let me flip this around - when we had our firstborn, I earned a very middle of the road salary - certainly under 50k. She made it clear she did not want to return to work (and I fully supported that decision) and following the end of maternity, the only way for us to maintain anything close to our lifestyle - which at the time was very low key (and stay living where we did) was for me to increase my earnings. As we've grown as a family, our expenses have too, and thus I've forever sought high paid work, which inevitably (in my industry) comes with more travel. We've regularly discussed about her returning back to work and me working locally and she's never wanted to do that and always been happy for me to be the sole earner.

She recently decided the house was too small and we moved house, I was relatively reluctant due to the increased financial pressures but her argument was reasonable about the house, and thus we double our monthly mortgage outgoings, plus all the additional expenses a larger house brings.

There is only one reason I had a job which involved travel and that was so she didn't have to go to work.

I fully appreciate a large number of SAHM "sacrifice" their careers and other things to allow their husbands to be career-driven and progress. That is absolutely not our situation. Although I earn "a lot" of money, I don't particularly have a career and I don't have any emotional attachment to my job.

@BogglesGoggles

I'd be really keen on this idea if it weren't for the fact she's already in a relationship. I am not sure it would work so well then?

I think you’re getting an unnecessarily hard time on here but unfortunately it’s because many women have been through the experience of having an ex bale out on them once the divorce is finalised and as such there is going to be a lot of projection here from personal experiences.

From my personal perspective, when I split from my eXH I very much took the view that we were equal parents, even though he was working and I was a SAHM. I’ve seen all too often people bickering over the DC, and many (and it is unfortunately often women) feel that they have the right to dictate the access arrangements. So I did agree to 50/50 from the outset, however I didn’t agree to one week on/one week off instead DS stayed two nights and every other weekend with each parent. The difference was that he used to come home to me after school even on his dad’s nights because I was still at home and eXH wasn’t.

However, if ex had to go away for work etc then it was obviously me who kept DS with me because i was still at home and he wasn’t. I was however looking for work but due to many factors including my health I have not been successful in this regard, but that’s an entirely different story.

What I did find however is that things changed drastically once eXH found a new partner, which happened within a short time of me moving out. She has her own DC, and they very much took precedence. And then she fell quickly pregnant and moved into eXH’s house which had formerly been the family home. Unfortunately my DS didn’t take to her at all, and although he spent time at eXH’s still he often showed reluctance to go.

When she moved in eXH suggested that DS could go to his house after school now as she would be there, but DS didn’t want to and so that never happened.

As time has gone on the amount of time that DS spends there has reduced significantly to the point that he hasn’t spent a weekday there for three years and hasn’t stayed there on a weekend for two.

Depending on how old the children are will often depend how the split of residency works, and even if you come to an agreement now on one schedule its highly likely that this will change over time anyway if you e.g. find new partners and move or even have more children.

In terms of her wanting to stay a SAHM, the courts won’t consider that when they consider residency. She won’t be able to argue that she should get primary residency purely because she wants to be a SAHM,.

Personally you need to seek legal advice to see how you proceed, because every case is different, and all families are different.

How old are your DC? M

It isn't really beneficial for the children to have 50/50. Studies have show children can't cope with that until at least 5, and even if they cope, it exhausts them
What evidence have you based this on? Because in my experience of children living in split families, the converse is true. I have seen so many children damaged by not seeing one parent or only seeing them intermittently. Where a 50/50 split has been put in place and the arrangements are consistent, children have thrived.

4/3 or 5/2 is still disruptive to the children. It's the constant few days here and there and having to move all their stuff around that's the issue. As a child I hated constantly taking my stuff in and out of bags, it was awful.

I would have thought it would work better? That way she is free to move in with her boyfriend etc without causing disruption to her children? If I were to ever find myself divorced I would 100% move on to a new relationship quickly ( for various but irrelevant reasons) and would consider this set up ideal.

You're missing the point - regardless of how attached you are to your career, her reticence to work FT, you both made a joint decision that you would be the (very very) high earner, enabled by her being a SAHM. You don't get extra points for not wanting that.

She is the main carer. You both have equal parental responsibility, and are equally able to make decisions regarding the children. If she were to move away with the children you would have to agree.

You earn a fuck ton. Your salary should be able to keep both of you housed. It should also mean the kids have a pretty decent standard of living.

Whilst regular good quality involved contact with you is vital, do you really think it's in their long term best interests for you to jack in your job which will mean they lose their home, live somewhere much smaller, their mum scrimping in the Lidl bargain aisle?

@titchy that’s not true a lot of the time though. If she refused to work then she made the decision and he had no choice but to increase his earnings. 100k single salary is less than £70k a year. If they live in an expensive area or private educate they’d struggle on less.

50 /50 is only in the dc best interests if they have a home and also you and your ex have a home. Children need a base not home swapping every week.

Stability for your children is the best thing. In the case of your family that may be your children staying in the family home and their mother remaining the main carer.

Of course if you and your wife had already been caring 50:50, stability would be that. Given that you seem so convinced that 50:50 is a a great idea, I can’t imagine why you didn’t do it years ago.

He says he currently earns 'low to mid' 6 figures....Could be on half a million a year and thinks he can justify dropping to £50k to get 50/50 and not pay maintenance. Whilst I'm not negating the importance of a father being actively involved in his children's lives, however you do the maths such a substantial drop in household income can't be beneficial.

OP, are private school fees involved?