Heartbroken by 50:50 custody

[Trickytroggle2]

My understanding is that 50:50 custody is the default? While I understand that it is in childrens' best interests to have a strong relationship with both parents, I don't understand why the default has to be 50:50.

I'm being told that the best thing is for parents to get along and not have difficult custody battles, so feel like I shouldn't argue it. But...having come from a marriage where I was not emotionally supported, with a refusal from my OH to take on an equal share of household tasks among other things, and generally feeling powerless, it feels like I am now being punished for that by having my children taken away from me.

I understand it's my childrens' best interests which should be at the heart of the decision not mine, but surely having a mother who is traumatised from being separated from her children for 50% of their lives is not in their best interests either? When I've asked my OH (by email to give him space to form a considered response) if he actually wants them 50%, he can't even say yes, so I don't feel that him having them less than 50% will have the same effect on him. It may be deep down, he does want that, but for whatever reason can't say it, but certainly the starting point for wanting 50:50 was not wanting to pay me anything, as we had a very direct conversation where he said that.

Surely a 50:50 default perpetuates people (especially women) staying in relationships that don't serve them/are damaging them because of the risk of losing time with their children?

I'm pretty sure there is no one answer, but just feeling really down and broken-hearted today about losing that time with my children, and even more powerless for intimating the separation.

You wouldn't have made such a stupid comment if you had actually experienced trauma. I will leave it there.

50/50 is ideal for kids in some situations, @Snorlaxo. It’s not a general rule. It depends on the kid, the parents, and the bonds that already exist between them.

@ChonkyRabbit I have no idea why you’re doubling down on such an ignorant viewpoint when you have no information to base your assertion on. I think it’s best you do leave it there and stop derailing.

*edited to correct my bad spelling only!

On MN 50/50 is the default, however in my experience real life is very different and 50/59 is actually rare.

Ex and I on paper have 50/50 but the reality is whilst she stays with him 50% of the time it isn't 50/50 parenting

As a result dd stays here on school days and does now with her dad but goes 2 nights a week after school for tea.

Contact has varied over the years, and as she has got older and school/homework demands have become more important she needs the stability of 1 location in the week.

If the adults treat it well then there is no trauma for the children.

Claiming trauma for the mum...sorry but that is massively emotive and coercive language. It is an adjustment but ultimately we made a choice to have children with these men. We trusted them to be good parents when we decided to have babies so we cannot unilaterally declare them as not just because it no longer suits us.

Obviously there are exceptions but realistically they are the minority

People need to think more about what getting divorced means. If you’re in a relationship with someone and you’re planning to have children, given the rate of separation now you need to IMO pre-emptively think about whether, if you separate, you will be happy for your children to be off with the other parent 50% of the time.

It is important for children to have an equal relationship with both parents where possible.

When I split from my eXH I essentially said that the DC could see him whenever they wanted. because I detest these women who go to court and seem to think that it’s not only perfectly acceptable, but should be the norm for the father to be happy with every other weekend. The children are equally each parent’s.

My DC did stop staying at their father’s for different reasons, but there was never any resistance on my part to let them see him. Why would there be?

If you want a divorce then you need to accept that not seeing the children for potentially 50% of the time is part of that.

Why is having your children half the time "traumatising" for you but not for their father?

It’s understandable that most parents ( mums AND dads) are upset about not seeing their children everyday. But traumatised ? Nope, if that’s genuinely the case then help is needed

contraary to on mn, in rl dads can do 50:50 and it’s not all about cms. Of course some cards, and mums make it about money ( eh mums don’t want 50:50 because they want maintenance)

it can and does work in many cases. But will largely depend on proximity of parents living arrangements, flexibility, ability to coparent etc.

and kids should not be made to feel guilty or see either parents feelings towards the other

most people don’t spend all their time in their children’s company. Most children are at school or are socialising with their friends. They spend about a third of the day asleep. Take all that away and they only have so much time to bond with you and their father. That’s why every other weekend and a night or two in the week is more or less 50% of quality time.

The 50:50 arrangements are usually about sharing the economic and practical burden of parenting.

The real issue here is how far you are willing to go to fight him. Because that really will upset the children’s lives. They don’t need two warring parents who can’t compromise on a co parenting arrangement.

You are the parent and you owe them a peaceful and secure childhood. They don’t you to live for them every waking moment of the day.

This site is full of threads from women whose partners have, apparently apropos of nothing and with feck all warning, decided they didn't want to be married/cohabiting with the mother of their children anymore. And subsequently swan off into the distance leaving the mother to bear most, if not all, of the daily grind - the burden of childcare, associated costs of childrearing, life admin, career stagnation, etc, etc.

Speaking with the wisdom and foresight that only a single, childless 40 something woman (extreme sarcasm alert) can have, I do sometimes catch myself wondering what would happen in a situation, where the husband/partner announces his intention to separate, the wife/mother brightly responds, "Excellent idea. No, don't YOU move out. I will. I'll get myself a nice little flat somewhere, focus on my career and finding someone else to have more kids with. The kids can stay with you, and I'll see them every other weekend or so (if I remember). I'll pay £2.50 per child maintenance into the bargain every other month."?

Wonder how eager all these men would be then to jettison the relationship?

I think this is a natural reaction at first, but everyone I know (with decent ex's/fathers) settled into 50/50 really well. I must admit, as a solo parent I even envy them a little. They have so much freedom and on the weeks they have their kids are completely switched on and the absolute best parenting versions of themselves. Of course 100% would still be the ideal, but you'll make it work, and may even end up reluctantly enjoying it.

The research I have read found that 50/50 isn’t best for children. They do best having a main home with one parent who they spend the majority of the time with. Based on this, 50/50 suits parents, not children.

I disagree.

50:50 is encouraged and supported in Scandinavia and those countries always end up in the happiest places to live…. I think that speaks volumes.

The standard view on mumsnet seems to be that 50:50 is bad because it’s bad for the kids (questionable) and it’s not fair for the mum to not have her kids more (but it’s seemingly fair for the dad)

People say this on here but then are unable to point to any of this research they have read. Can you?

Does he actually want them 50% though?
How old are they?

This. Lots of people are also mentioning men wanting 50:50 to avoid maintenance, which definitely does happen, but MN also shows that a lot of men work insane hours because many women feel a god given right to stay at home or work very part time. Many men step up to 50:50 once the burden of supporting everyone single handed is eased and the working hours are less, which is usually when the moaning threads about the ex being better with the kids etc once separated than he was when together start. If everyone is working and parenting equally before a split then 50:50 is a natural step.

I was a child of divorce, and there’s no way I would have wanted to spend 50% of my time at DF’s new home with an evil stepmother, her older sons, and the new kids. But I was 6 so my wants would have been ignored. Thank god I got to sleep in my own bed, at home with mum every night.

Ex and I do 50/50 and it works absolutely fine for us. But he is a devoted and involved parent and we are on good terms most of the time.
I didn’t find it traumatic to be separated from DD. Because it wasn’t - she is with her other, perfectly able parent when she’s not with me.

That’s a personal anecdote, not research. 50:50
would be horrific for some and work brilliantly for others, no two situations are the same.

Unless they are absolute bastards. In this situation they won't give a shit how unhappy their kids are as long as it guarantees you are unhappy too.

I can’t imagine how shit it must be to be shunted from one house to another like a sack of spuds, having to organise every aspect of your social/school life around that fact, just so your mum and dad can say it’s a “fair” split. Fair on who?

You need to find out what he actually wants to start with. My ex wouldn't have wanted to pick the kids up from school or anything, since he was at work and said that wasn't convenient. Whilst that might sound selfish, it suited me as I didn't want to lose too much time with them. It was a while ago now and 50/50 in general wasn't as common but I think communicating with your ex is the key.

Most men who couldn't be bothered to parent whilst in their relationship will actually do 50/50 unless they get a new girlfriend who takes this on. He may say he wants it but when he understands how much it costs to actually have a child 50/50 and parent them, I doubt it will stick. Hold your nerve.

It depends on how complex those arrangements are. My DH and his ex live 5 mins apart and because both are present parents and involved with school, clubs and friendships there hasn’t been any stress around organisation. I think those issues arise when one parent is checked out and leaving it to the other to be default, because then things don’t get done on the non-defaults time. People always paint a picture of a 50:50 child being shunted about with a suitcase like a holiday tourist - all my DSD moves with her is her school bag, her houses are home from home and both meet all her needs.

Not dramatic, being separated from your young children when you have been their primary carer (and when you know they have to go to an abusive man) is traumatic.